Name something these niggas innovated

I'll disprove you with facts and logic.

Attached: A-82730-1319532331.jpeg.jpg (300x297, 9K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/Ukbu9dmmzJg
youtu.be/e40Jz-jKcQc
youtu.be/PMMe3iwBV-I
youtu.be/ZCSzxkbMri8
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

They popularized things. That's worth something.

They were the first band to print their lyrics on the sleeve of the album.

How popular a band can be

Heavy Metal.

The fact that so many books still name the Beatles as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. Jazz critics have long recognized that the greatest jazz musicians of all times are Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all times. Classical critics rank the highly controversial Beethoven over classical musicians who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Rock critics are still blinded by commercial success. The Beatles sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore they must have been the greatest. Jazz critics grow up listening to a lot of jazz music of the past, classical critics grow up listening to a lot of classical music of the past. Rock critics are often totally ignorant of the rock music of the past, they barely know the best sellers. No wonder they will think that the Beatles did anything worthy of being saved.

In a sense, the Beatles are emblematic of the status of rock criticism as a whole: too much attention paid to commercial phenomena (be it grunge or U2) and too little to the merits of real musicians. If somebody composes the most divine music but no major label picks him up and sells him around the world, a lot of rock critics will ignore him. If a major label picks up a musician who is as stereotyped as can be but launches her or him worldwide, your average critic will waste rivers of ink on her or him. This is the sad status of rock criticism: rock critics are basically publicists working for major labels, distributors and record stores. They simply highlight what product the music business wants to make money from.

How much amazing shit can fit into a single record. They were the first to test the limits of that.

This.

go ahead and find another Tomorrow Never Knows, i'll be waiting

Why does he like The Doors?

this. rock bands weren't really popular before the beatles came along. of course there were rock bands but they were named after the lead singer, or named "x singer and the y," stuff like that. the beatles turned the rock band into a singular unit

>elvis
>frank sinatra
ok

literally all church hymns, carols, folk tunes and more that date back to the 1930s did this

Jimi Hendrix - Purple Haze
Black Sabbath - S/T
not to mention a lot of early 'proto-punk' including The Sonics could be called metal if we're saying helter skelter is

blonde on blonde, 1966, sweaty

what part exactly?

what? many rock n roll bands gave themselves inclusive names, even the Rat Pack did

That's the way it is now. Consensus on what's good is so tainted by corporate influence in entertainment media. There's no going back.

Unless...

Tape loops.

Not everyone that innovates shit is good. Music isn't science.

the sonics were more protopunk than anything, sabbath s/t dropped in ‘70, and purple haze? I’d probably agree if you said voodoo child (slight return) but viewing purple haze as a heavier track than helter skelter is retarded.

youtu.be/Ukbu9dmmzJg
1966
youtu.be/e40Jz-jKcQc
1967

>what part exactly?
The whole song dumbass. Name something similar that came before or shut the fuck up

They released the first western pop song that incorporates the Indian sitar.

the first and the last lmao

This. Love you to is based.

^ this. george’s boner for india really did set a solid foundation for psych/drone rock. the 13th floor elevators were secretly sketching the blueprint for it at the same time.

Actually it was Norwegian Wood. But Love You To is indeed based. Top 3 song on Revolver for me

>The Beatles popularity as a group wasn't unique
>Names individual artists

Are you an idiot or have you not listened to The End and Paint it Black?

this

>>elvis
>>frank sinatra
>ok
Elvis and Sinatra aren't bands

>blonde on blonde, 1966, sweaty
Rubber soul came before

>Jimi Hendrix - Purple Haze
>Black Sabbath - S/T
Jimi Hendrix is hard rock, Black Sabbath S/T was recorded like a year after Helter Skelter came out

>what? many rock n roll bands gave themselves inclusive names, even the Rat Pack did
He meant that the Beatles turned rock bands where every member gets attention into a worldwide phenomenon

Oh yeah. I forgot about that.

Beatles weren't innovators, although they were the first mainstream band and to put experimentations in their albums, no mainstream band was doing that at the time, they were excellent songwriters and Paul was an excellent musician. The things they reached without knowing jackshit about music theory is amazing.

They wrote beautiful music and they were not the best at it. It's more than enough.

>they were the best at it.

Lol fixed I'm dumb.

Hidden or backwards messages in their songs about paul dead
Ha beat that loser

>every member gets attention into a worldwide phenomenon
Was Dean Martin and Frank Sinatra not individually known? Sammy Davis Jr neither?

What about their backing musicians?

its not about innovation, its about popularising something. the beatles weren't the only merseybeat group when they started, nor were they the only psych-pop group in 1967, or the only progressive pop group at the end of their career. the whole point is that they brought these things to the mainstream, much like how Radiohead aren't inherently innovative, they're a primer band for exploring different and previously obscure forms of music.

>whataboutery
The Beatles had backing musicians in the studio too, but they never became popular either. I'll give you live performances but it's a dead argument

NAME ONE SINGLE SONG THAT SOUNDS LIKE TOMORROW NEVER KNOWS

ONE
SINGLE
SONG

Uhhhhhhhhh Rain? Please don’t hurt me :(

I don't know enough about music to answer that. But they're my favorite band. I don't care if they didn't know music theory, they made some of my favorite songs and I love them.

Based and checked.

listen to more 60's psych you tourist, Jefferson Airplane and Hendrix were doing stuff far beyond the psych of the beatles at the time

completely different type of music you tard tourist

They don't sound like Tomorrow Never Knows, do they?

Hendrix is blues rawk

Attached: 33979c402223dd81124f4bd49d263b4a.jpg (500x483, 33K)

Based Jimi Hendrix that released his first album in 1967 but somehow managed to make something more psych than TNK in 66

After Bathing at Baxter's came out in 67, a year after never knows, dumbass

>never invent anything
>knew nothing about music theory
>still manages to be the greatest band of all times

Is there a more chad band?

Attached: 1554963980940.jpg (1181x798, 756K)

Sgt. Pepper arguably had the first hidden track on an album if you count the dog whistle and the inner groove chatter after "A Day in the Life".
If not, then Abbey Road's "Her Majesty" is the first hidden track.

Name a band that brought a song like Revolution 9 to the masses.

Helter Skelter isn't heavy metal. Just because it's heavy doesn't mean it's metal.

Here:
youtu.be/PMMe3iwBV-I
OP BTFO'd by based Leonard Bernstein

They did every single genre possible better than anything that came before them.

Helter Skelter isn't even heavy, it's just fast. Yer Blues is havier than it.

>plants a musique concrète masterpiece in almost every stacy's bedroom
based

my favourite beatles song, i love how gritty the bass sounds. kinda feel they over-perfected it with the 2018 mix though

I can't, because no song sounds just like another. All songs are unique in that regard, which makes them not really unique, therefore Tomorrow Never Knows, while sounding like no other song before it, is not special.

kek

The Doctor Who theme.

What are some special rock songs? Inca roads?

> no song sounds just like another
I take it you’ve never listened to The Final Cut, then?

Like I said, if the argument is "no song sounded like it before it", then every song qualifies for that, which is not a special qualification. It's mundane.

Can you prove they sound the same?

What? Helter Skelter isn't fast. Anyway, the first heavy metal song is Black Sabbath - Black Sabbath. This is indisputable.

Clear Light made a heavy metal song in 1967 with Street Singer.
Riders of the Mark did the same the same year.
>This is indisputable.
Fuck off, tourist.

That's heavy psych. Actually, I'd say Shelter is more "heavy metal" than Black Sabbath, which is still in the shadow of dark psych

Speed King by Deep Purple is metal and was made a year before Sabbath.

>That's heavy psych.
Meaningless RYM term. Clear Light and Riders are not heavy psych, they are metal.
>Actually, I'd say Shelter is more "heavy metal" than Black Sabbath
Absolutely moronic opinion.

TVU - I Heard Her Call My Name blocks your path

That clear lightning song isn't metal. Distortion =/= metal
If i found the right Riders of the Mark song that's just hard rock.

True, but was it really made before Black Sabbath?

No difference to Vanilla Fudge or Cream

>implying that song is even remotely metal
Are you retarded?

I don't know how much they innovated, and I think they had really great marketing behind them, but it's not always about innovation. They are fun to listen to, and that's alright. At least for me

It is metal. There are many songs with distortion before it that aren't metal, but Street Singer is metal, close to doom metal too, just like Sabbath.
Riders is heavy metal too, even more than Sabbath, so check your ears.

That album was recorded in 1969 except for one of the songs that wasn't Speed King.

Those are not metal. The ones I mentioned are.

Based

>It is metal
What makes them metal? I wouldn't classify the riffs as metal.

>That album was recorded in 1969
So was Black Sabbath.

Street Singer sounds like early Deep Purple, get fucked

It's all dark prog to me

Attached: 1553198644633.png (628x850, 126K)

I wish dark prog was a real genre. Something less gleeful and hippyish than regular prog rock but not as memey and wanky as prog metal.

The riffs sound doomy and metallic, just like Black Sabbath's.

Black Sabbath's debut was recorded in 1970. Check again.

False. Even then, Deep Purple had some. Metal songs before Sabbath (not as metal as Street Singer however).

That's avant-prog.

It was recorded in October 1969 according to Iommi's autobiography.

None of their stuff that makes them special was invented by them. What's notable is what they managed to use those within a framework of a pop song. It's why they inspired a lot of people to start being more ambitious and pushing beyond the scope of the pop song even from the very beginning. Many musicians praised them from the get go and they shifted the paradgim radically.

The phrasing in their earliest songs (Please Please Me/With The Beatles) was something that had no parallel to pop music at the time. The chromaticism was also not at all common for bands at the time, not in the way they used it anyhow. They're one of the first bands to explore shifting time signatures - the chorus of She Said She Said effectively shifts very rapidly in terms of rhythmic accents - to make use of drones and a heavy use of modality - as early as 1963, with Don't Bother Me being in Dorian of all things.

And for us it is lost, but for the time they were rebellious, energetic and vivaceous in ways that other pop stars were not. Compare and contrast the music of the Brill Building era with the works of The Beatles around the same time. I Want To Hold Your Hand, however light and corny it may sound to us, harbors a sense of energy that wasn't found anywhere - just listen to the intro's guitars.

>Rubber soul came before
Rubber soul is a mediocre Byrd rip off.

>first western pop song that incorporates the Indian
youtu.be/ZCSzxkbMri8

I don't know

See My Friends does not use a sitar; it takes influence from Indian music but in instrumentation it does not use any instruments like that.

byrds are a mediocre hard days night rip off

Attached: zappa03a.jpg (350x350, 27K)

>masses

fucking this get off this board OP

/thread

They were the first rock band to use ragas as a compositional tool

>See My Friends does not use a sitar; it takes influence from Indian music but in instrumentation it does not use any instruments like that.

Yes, that just makes it better. They completely introduced the raga into a new context. The Beatles doing it with the sitar was actually regressive. Asides from Tommorow Never Knows, which is incredible and a head of the curve.

>better
Not relevant. We are discussing firsts (objective), not what is "better (*subjective, and thus irrelevant).

lol show me the Beatles creating the guitar jangle of Tambourine Man.

See: A Hard Day's Night

It doesn't incorporate the Indian sitar, though. Those are guitars

The use of raga style was first done by The Kinks. How is that subjective? Merely using a sitar instead of a guitar doesn't change much.

Also Imo it is actually less impressive as it is closer to the source.

>The use of raga style was first done by The Kinks
Not really. It was just a guitar line in Western Harmony. not a raga nor even an Eastern instrument

See: Love You Too to hear what I am talking about
>Also Imo it is actually less impressive as it is closer to the source.
So reward them for watering down ideas to pale imitation? OK

They literally tried to mimic the sitar with a guitar. 6 months before Norwegian Wood.


>So reward them for watering down ideas to >pale imitation?
Not sure what you meant by this. I don't think either band "watered down" or were disrespectful to other musical cultures

>They literally tried to mimic the sitar with a guitar
That wasn't the argument. So it's not relevant
> I don't think either band "watered down" or were disrespectful to other musical cultures
But the artist who used the actual instrument was more respectful than the other.

>>knew nothing about music theory
kek. they knew a fuckload

The earliest experimental pop music I can think of is probably Telstar. I'm 100% sure there are earlier examples.

The evolution of ideas of Tomorrow Never Knows leaded us to this.
And this is beautiful.

Attached: nts-sessions-14-5bca85d1e3679.jpg (1000x1000, 61K)