Is it weird that I think this is their best?

It’s in the top 3 for sure, but I think I may prefer Revolver & Abbey Road. It’s definitely much better than Sgt Pepper

Hot take: The American albums tended to be better.
OP's fave?
Meet the Beatles?
Beatles '65?
US Rubber Soul?
All classics and better than their British counterparts.

baby, you're a rich man is awful. lyrically it's even weaker than sit. pepper's, most songs are very thin. your mother should know is just crap writing, however catchy. it's the only post-help beatles album where songs are not tight, some really go on too long and meander like blue jay way or strawberry fields. still a bright and beautiful album, but less than perfect.

bs

Meet the Beatles - deletes most of the crap covers and tacks on 3 originals at the start of the record that are good

Beatles '65 - I Feel Fine is one of their best early songs and deserves to be on an album and their feeble version of the Little Richard medley Kansas City/Hey-Hey-Hey-Hey doesn't.

Rubber Soul - I've Just Seen a Face sets the scene better than Drive My Car

And everyone prefers Magical Mystery Tour as an album.

(Admittedly The Beatles' Second Album and Beatles VI aren't better than the "official canon")

>baby, you're a rich man is awful
>your mother should know is just crap writing
>strawberry fields goes on too long
Wow, those are some shit opinions you got there.

Your right, look at this AMAZING writing:

Let's all get up and dance to a song
That was a hit before your mother was born
Though she was born a long long time ago
Your mother should know (your mother should)
Your mother should know
Sing it again
Let's all get up and dance to a song
That was a hit before your mother was born
Though she was born a long long time ago
Your mother should know (your mother should)
Your mother should know
Lift up your hearts and sing me a song
That was a hit before your mother was born
Though she was born a long long time ago
Your mother should know (your mother should)
Your mother should know
Your mother should know (your mother should)
Your mother should know
Sing it again
Da da dada da da da dada dada dada da da
Da dada da da
Though she was born a long long time ago
Your mother should know (your mother should)
Your mother should know
Your mother should know (your mother should)
Your mother should know
Your mother should know (your mother should)
Your mother should know, yeah

Cold take: [spoiler]Only two of those are good.[/spoiler]

>Lyrics = songwriting

>he thinks that songwriting and lyrics are the same thing

>Writing is exclusively songwriting and never lyrics

>Feel free to ask questions of why I think so
Why do you think so?

ok, so i meant lyrics. will you now make your argument as to why those lyrics are amazing?

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 65K)

You prob think that because most people on this board think that. Ths same post is made every day. You're all mistaken tho. The best Beatles record is hard days night. It's a perfect pop record.

No, because they're not. Bad lyrics don't make it a bad song though.

Since a song is 50% lyrics and 50% music, it completely is.

They also keep it from being a great song, let alone "the best"

i never said it was a bad song. i said the writing, which i should have specified to mean lyrics, was crap

>It's a perfect pop record.
>When i Get Home exists
kek

I never said it was the best either.
Okay, we can agree on that. I just don't personally think that two songs with bad lyrics (Hello Goodbye's are trash too) is enough to knock this record off the top spot.

>I never said it was the best either.
Oh you didn't read the thread?

i wasn't trying to knock it off the top spot. i was just stating my opinions. i think i am the walrus is trash lyrically, yet it's one of my favorite songs.

Imo it’s the worst Beatles album. Can’t be fucked to rewrite them but here’s my thoughts on it anyway

rateyourmusic.com/collection/HotOpinions/rating72536785

Let's be honest here. MMT is their best album because there are no Ringo tracks

What's wrong with When I get home? It's one of my favs!

It's a strong point in it's favour alright...
youtube.com/watch?v=PTKEiQHHsuk

>I like it, so that means it's good!
No

Definitely my second favorite of theirs next to the white album. Severely underrated album.

>repetition = bad

Attached: wojak.png (474x296, 51K)

Well, It has less probability of being good.

By this logic serialist classical has the best chance of being good.

it's not that it's repetitive, it's that it's devoid of any meaning yet even as a carefree song it's underdeveloped. usually the beatles develop the story. here, it's just nothing.

That's a fair assessment

50% lyrics are you fucking insane? the lyrics can literally be about anything or just be gibberish and a song still works. this isn't rap retard.

>50% lyrics are you fucking insane?
No, that's the legal definition. Are you a non-musician or something?

Oh, cool. I'm OK with this worldview.

That’s like saying pizza is 50% dough 50% sauce and toppings. What is this fucked logic lol

yeah man, i mean what about the pepperoni percentage and what about that cheese, bro

Also
>pizza is 50% dough 50% sauce and toppings
By weight, it could possibly be.

>. Are you a non-musician or something?
yes obviously. not like being bedroom guitarist is any better

"I don't like it so that makes it bad" quit being a faggot. It's an objectively good British take on Motown. "Come on, out my way!" one of my favorite vocal deliveries from Lennon, so much gusto. If you can't see the pop genius in that song you're a fucking retard.

>"I don't like it so that makes it bad"
Quote me where I said that

>not like being bedroom guitarist is any better
It slightly is, but that's not my point: that there are literal legal definitions of what constitutes a song, and someone with no musical knowledge would probably be ignorant of this.

jesus christ the sperg levels are going deep

Attached: QW6Fe.png (425x317, 274K)

yeah it could be, like if you analogized it to spoken word music over a drum pattern. But could be doesn't justify making the blanket statement that it's always 50/50. This is a ridiculous conversation anyway

>But could be doesn't justify making the blanket statement that it's always 50/50
Right, but legality does, as I explained twice now

Stop posting, you are a musically unintelligent neanderthal

Lmao don't be pedantic, you implied it's a bad track with no evidence to support your case. Don't waste my time with your baseless squaking kid

>you implied
Not what I asked.

Try again

It's a song that your mother should know

while you guys argue i'm just gonna say that my favourite beatles song is Don't Let Me Down, the studio version, not the rooftop one. Have a great day folks

No one's been arguing for the last 45 minutes you dummy

Is quality an actual feature of the world? Does good and bad ontologicaly exist?

omg, no u didnt lol

>Right, but legality does
What do you mean by legally?

Meaning, the legal definition. Ever written and published a song before?

that's a complete strawman. The legality of publishing a song has nothing to do with the actual essence of music

>actual essence
Which is objectively what?

Your Mother Should Know is legit awful. Baby You're A Rich Man is incredible though

that music is a lot more than just music

...such as?

Avoid non answers please

Just a reminder.

Attached: Capture+_2018-11-24-22-17-45.png (715x372, 129K)

>Pepper has Granny shit
>implying Your Mother Should Know
yikes

the music's impact, influences, all the meta shit that occurs outside of the music. How much it was promoted, how big budget the music had, everything else.

>impact
>influence
>meta shit outside of the art
>promotion
>budget
All of that applies to lyrics as well

Nice try.

No Beatles album can escape from the Granny Shit, so it's about comparing how much granny shit there are on each album.

So... one song vs one song?

Okay now you're just trolling

Fixing a hole

>retardalert.jpg
Are you fuckin' high? What the fuck does budget have to do with lyrics

Revolver > Abbey Road > Whitey Album > MMT > Sgt. Pepper's > Rubber Soul > Help! > AHDN > Let it Be > PPM > MtB > BfS.

Attached: 1553357614354.jpg (743x926, 97K)

Not an argument. Try again.
It would effect the time allowed for the lyricist to create the lyrics, as well as the production value of the vocal track itself.

Unless you don't know the difference between an SM58 and a Neumann u47?

How is that Granny shit?

>fixing a hole
>granny shit

Get lost with your faggy continental pseudo garbage. There is objectively good and bad art, and to say otherwise is the immature high school shrieking of someone who seriously lacks any true opinion or substance.

>There is objectively good and bad art, and to say otherwise is the immature high school shrieking of someone who seriously lacks any true opinion or substance.
OK, then how is it objectively measured?

Through the alliance of the apollo and Dionysus. When forms of disorder and order meet, John Lennon is a fantastic example, he'll go from sweet to sour at the drop of a hat, perfectly in balance. Have to much of one or the other and it's garbage. (See Radiohead)

>sweet and sour
Subjective criteria

Try again

magical mystery tour in MONO is amazing. the stereo is crap. tbqh if you listen to any Beatles stuff in any kind of stereo - original hard panned stereo mixes or recent remasters - you are a pleb level fan. Real Beatles fans understand the immense significance of MONO to the beatles' albums, much like the Beach Boys.

the beatles themselves hated the stereo mixes, and at least three of them minus paul used to wear "back to mono" spector buttons to clearly show their preference for mono.

just try recording your own music while monitoring in mono and doing initial mixes in mono. it's far superior and more cohesive to your brain. when you monitor a mix in stereo and, for example, hear reverb bellowing out all around you, it's distracting, but in mono everything powers through the center and you get a sense of clarity and direct placement of things. also, mixing in mono allows for the wonderful blending of different elements, creating new and novel sounds which would be separated and distinct familiar sounds in stereo. people mostly gave Brian Wilson such great praise because you couldn't clearly decipher what instruments were doing what in their mono mixes, they blended into a new sound, and the stereo takes that away and makes everything a bland spaciousness again.

maybe i'm just autistic but i seriously hate stereo. it was a big mistake in music imho and nothing but a money making gimmick that got totally out of hand, to the point where people these days auto assume stereo is superior, when it is not at all. i want to hear a Nirvana album properly mixed in mono. it would be incredible.

Partially inaccurate.
>Real Beatles fans understand the immense significance of MONO to the beatles' albums
*of the early albums
>the beatles themselves hated the stereo mixes, and at least three of them minus paul used to wear "back to mono" spector buttons to clearly show their preference for mono.
This is incorrect, they seemed to have no preference themselves. They themselves probably listened to their own personal albums in stereo, as they had the money to invest in the technology. furthermore, by 1968 they were aware of the difference and intentionally made the mono and stereo mixes differ as an artistic statement.

Also, those Back To Mono signified their friendship and professional arrangements with Phil Spector, not a preference. Note the albums John and George made at that time--produced by Spector--were in stereo.

>just try recording your own music while monitoring in mono and doing initial mixes in mono.
While this is true, this would not have been a decision by The Beatles themselves, but simply the setup of EMI Studios at the time.
>people mostly gave Brian Wilson such great praise because you couldn't clearly decipher what instruments were doing what in their mono mixes
This is a different case, since 1) Brian was deaf in one ear and experienced music in mono himself, but also 2) he didn't trust the record buying public in terms of speaker placement in a given room.

>maybe i'm just autistic but i seriously hate stereo. it was a big mistake in music imho and nothing but a money making gimmick that got totally out of hand, to the point where people these days auto assume stereo is superior, when it is not at all. i want to hear a Nirvana album properly mixed in mono. it would be incredible.
Now you are just being a dipshit

I disagree, descriptive terms aren't subjective. You can hear his voice go from strained and pained to soothing and restrained from one word to the next. I see you're not actually putting effort into your argument and just trolling so take care!

>You can hear his voice go from strained and pained to soothing and restrained from one word to the next.
But if that's good or bad, is completely subjective.

Now do you see?

The US albums were cut and rearranged to make extra albums for more money. Art had nothing to do with it.

It has some of their best songs but I think it's too compilation-y to be counted among their best albums as a whole.

Put it in context dude, it was the closing number of the TV film. Plus it's still better than anything put out this century.

I do prefer US Rubber Soul and I think their early US albums were more consistent, but by the time 1965/66 rolled around their material was too varied to work with the formula Capitol was using. The US albums are fun to have, especially on vinyl, and I don't think they should be dismissed because they're just as important to the Beatles' success in America as their UK counterparts in Europe.

>but I think it's too compilation-y
why?

GRANNY'D

Attached: smug paul.jpg (380x595, 135K)

Except Hello Goodbye was the closing number

Because it's literally a compilation

at least it's better than Yellow Submarine
fuck George Martin and his shit Orchestra

Fuck off, it was a nice score.

The thing is, every Beatles album is their best album. I find myself switching between what my favorite is of theirs every few years. You can make the argument for each of their albums

Make a case for Beatles for Sale then.
No Response and I'm a Loser are not enough

...of tracks all recorded around the same time.

>Through the alliance of the apollo and Dionysus. When forms of disorder and order meet,
Holy cringe batman, that's all you got?

Are you kidding me?
I'll Follow the Sun, Eight Days a Week, I don't Wanna Spoil the Party, and What Your Doing are enough to make it a classic

Hahahahaha