Did the Beatles actually do anything innovative? The Kinks were playing sitars before them...

litteraly who

What band did anything close to Tommorow Never Knows?

The Kinks >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Beatles

And this is coming from a burger that doesn't into british culture.

[spoiler] I'm a secret anglophile and love England/UK history [/spoiler]

The Beach Boys - Good Vibrations and Surf's Up

The Beatlers were fake and gay, they didn't even exist because Paul MacCourtney, John Lenin, Harrison Ford and Jeffree Star were just recruited by George Martian to pose and fake to teach teenage girls how to fake organisms while he claimed to write and record all the music but in reality there was a second layer of reality that was that George Martian sampled all of the Beatlers music from the songs of underground bands that were much more revolutionary than the Beatlers could ever dream to be even if they existed (which they didn't) and also he travelled back to the time from the present to bring the so-called revolutionary technics into the time when they didn't yet exist but that are now commonplace so you'd swallow him as a new revolutionary record producer when in reality he was just a run-of-the-mill hipster born in the 90s and tricked everyone into believing the Beatlers were a real band and it all was to promote the homosexual agenda and also to teach girls how to fake organisms when everyone knew it was common knowledge that the female organism is a myth invented by feminists and if you don't believe me ask yourself what the Beatlers are famous for and you'll know the answer, they never went to the moon btw so you're wrong if you think they did because it was Nile Armstrong that first walked on the moon except he didn't because the first man to really walk on the moon was nobody because the NSA never went to the moon, it's literally impossible as the universe is flat and held back by gravity that makes it impossible to exit the atmosphere so the NSA could literally not have gone to the moon and the Beatlers only "composed" the soundtrack to John Malkovich's fake moon landing except as you should by now know the Beatlers were fake and gay so it was actually composed by George Martian and you know it's true that MacCourtney and Lenin never wrote a single note in their entire lives and only some communist hipster would believe that they did

/thread

Zappa

But those songs are not remotely similar to Tomorrow Never Knows and Tomorow Never Knows came out before them anyway. What a shit reply user.

Their main contribution was bringing greater harmonic sophistication to rock music, their most important works were the early albums like A Hard Day's Night and With the Beatles

They were both recorded in 1966 faggot, and the style isn't relevant, Good Vibrations and Surf's Up and just as experimental while retaining a pop sound. So they side something close, twice. You boneheaded retard.

So they did something close*

There you go fellas.

>The Kinks >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Beatles
Why lie to yourself like that?

Attached: 1557644814247.png (396x385, 131K)

I hate when people just say unsupported shit.

The Kinks' song Fancy has what SOUNDS like a sitar on it. I actually think it's someone playing an acoustic guitar in a manner as to approximate a sitar sound. But, let's say it's sitar. The song was recorded on May 13, 1966. More than five months AFTER Norwegian Wood by The Beatles. So much for your Kinks theory. ...Much as I love The Kinks.

>Did I say Kinks? I meant Rolling Stones!

Wrong again, bunky! Paint It Black was recorded in March 1966. Three months after Norwegian Wood. Don't look now, but The Kinks got beat to the sitar by TWO bands!!

>The fucking with tapes and random sound shit was all being done first and better by other bands.
Seems like at least part of that is untrue.

I told you I was a secret anglophile who likes the English culture in the Kinks music. They are very on par with the Beatles (you can't deny that) if not better imo. Face to Face through Arthur were all excellent 10/10 albums.

I am denying that. Face to Face has like 6 good songs on it.

Not even the an english nationalist think Kinks were better than Beatles. In fact, no one does.

>imo

Deny my opinion all you like, but I disagree with your opinion as well.

I don't even understand why being the first to use a sitar is such a big thing. No one is talking about Brian Jones's innovative use of the marimba in Under My Thumb, for example, because there are literally hundreds of instruments and in the 60s there would have been countless instances of any one particular song being the first to use any one particular instrument. What's so special about the sitar?

MAYBE THAT'S WHY A BURGER WHO LIKES ENGLISH CULTURE MIGHT LIKE THEM MORE L O L

Christ, don't get me wrong I love the Beatles too, it's just my preference.

>Deny my opinion all you like
>(you can't deny that)
Which is it?

people irrationally hate the beatles and want to find any reason possible to dislike them.

First example of Eastern influence in Western rock music...

You have your opinion, I have mine. We disagree on a chinese cotton farming board. End of story.

Your post has more of an argument with OP than with me. HE, not I, brought up the sitar as an important moment in rock. I couldn't care less one way or the other about it. I was simply calling bullshit on his assertion that the credit for it goes to The Kinks.

I think this John Mendelson guy who used to write liner notes to Kinks compilation albums originated this legend about The Kinks bringing sitar to the world before The Beatles. Since then, people have parroted the lie over and over.

And, if we're gonna get technical about it, the first instance of sitar on a pop record was its prominent use in some of the instrumental soundtrack tracks on the American version of Help! (Which is where George first got exposed to it.) This was August 1965.

>(you can't deny that)

"The Beatles were innovators was just stolen from other (album)s." the same as ever other innovative group or individual ever. Where do you think ideas come from?

>Did the Beatles actually do anything innovative?
Can you link some Rock songs that sound like She Loves You or Love Me Do before 63?

Everly Brothers

>The Kinks' song Fancy
youtube.com/watch?v=ZCSzxkbMri8
Literally sounds like a later Beatles song in 1965. You hear dat Indian influence.

...

>no sitar

Imiating sitar indian influence and being the first to do it. I say that's even more impressive than just buying a Sitar after hearing this song and copying them like The Beatles did.

Obviously you can, and did. Do you always take hyperbole super serious? You're a very exceptional user ( ^:

>The Kinks were playing sitars before them.

What songs? The ones I know from them sounds nothing like early Beatles songs. The songwriting is different and lacks the energy.

I'm sorry. They were too poor to afford sitars but they came up with the ideas of sitars and having Indian influence in rock before The Beatles. Are you happy now?

>What songs?
Most of them.
>The ones I know from them sounds nothing like early Beatles songs.
I think they sound very similar. I'm pretty sure The Beatles cited them as an influence as well.
>The songwriting is different
They were written by different people so that would follow.

>they came up with the ideas of sitars
I thought the Indians did that.
>before The Beatles
Apparently not since they didn't play any sitars until after The Beatles did.

>I thought the Indians did that.
Did you read the part of the sentence where I said "in rock"
>Apparently not since they didn't play any sitars until after The Beatles did.
You are denying they came up with the ideas for sitars and putting Indian influence before in a song before The Beatles when they made a song imitating sitar and having Indian influence before The Beatles. What makes you think that?

God I love good old fashioned Beatlesfag autism.

t.Beatlesfag

>What makes you think that?
The fact that they didn't play sitars until after the Beatles did.

>The Kinks were playing sitars before them.
That's false.

But he's saying they used eastern influences in rock music before the Beatles, mimicking a sitar with a guitar. I don't know who's wrong here, but that's what I got from what he wrote.

an hipster does not comb his or her hair because a real hipster likes shoegaze but if you like shoegaze and comb your hair you really don't like shoegaze and you are not an hipster but a mainstream boy or girl who thinks Paul McCourtney is an hero whose music after the Beatlers is superior to the music of the Beatlers and also calls himself or herself an hipster and therefore is not an hipster because real hipsters know they are hipsters and don't have to call themselves hipsters and the realist hipster is the one that likes mainstream music too but an hipster who says Sgt Pepe's is not the Beatlers' best album is not an hipster because it is an historical fact that Sgt Pepe's is the Beatlers' best album and also an historical fact that Paul McCourtney is an hero and superior to Lenin in most ways but not all ways because in some ways Lenin was superior and actually even George Harrison and maybe even Jeffree Star was superior in some ways to some of the other Beatlers but anyway the realist hipster is one that likes the music of the Beatlers and in particular Sgt Pepe's but doesn't claim that it is an historical fact that Sgt Pepe's is the most seminal album in their career because it is but a proper hipster downplays its importance because he or she has to make it sound like he or she knows some obscure band that made an album as historically important with similarly seminal content before the Beatlers even thought about Sgt Pepe's and also the realist hipster knows that it is true and that there were many bands whose influence the Beatlers couldn't have birthed Sgt Pepe's without but he or she also knows that the Beatlers are not an essential band for an hipster because they are mainstream and only their music and aesthetic are of value you are not an hipster because you think shoegaze is better than the Beatlers but guess what it is an historical fact that the Beatlers invented shoegaze so in your mum's face

Do you know how to read. I didn't say playing sitars. I said the ideas for sitars.

He is baiting because he knows he is wrong.

They were imitating sitars and adding eastern influence into their music but the mad men beatles decided to literally fly to India and buy a sitar there because they liked The Kinks song.

Alright user, continue on, this is a juicy thread, got my popcorn ready.

>They were imitating sitars and adding eastern influence into their music
Yes. But they didn't were playing sitar before The Beatles. OP's statement is false.

Why were so many of George's songs so fucking shit? He worked well as a secondary ideas guy but holy fuck was his songwriting ever dreadfully corny, even more so than Paul at times. I guess Something kind of redeems him but the Beatles were over by that time.

I already conceded I was wrong on saying they literally played sitars but then argued that it didn't matter because having the idea is all that matters.

Go listen to your granny garbage. George is the best songwriter.

>but then argued that it didn't matter because having the idea is all that matters.
I agree with you on that.

What is the whole "granny" meme? I snoop around Beatles threads occasionally and I know their discography reasonably well but I don't understand this meme.

Beatles' innovations are on structure:
youtu.be/PMMe3iwBV-I

John Lennon ____ his wife

Awww come on don't just "agree", keep reeeeeing at each other please.

*filing in the blank* BEAT or in Yoko's case CHEATED

The Beatles is probably the greatest band of all time but if you include solo artists I don't think their music is even top 100.

What is the safe opinion bs? Keep arguing with the Kinks fan.

I'm the kinks guy. I was just making a statement the retards in this thread would get angry at

You idiot, don't expose your troll ops Thanks for killing the thread.

>innovative
>The fucking with tapes and random sound shit

has anyone ever done that since 2000?

I'm not trolling. My opinions are serious but he wanted me to say something to get the arguments rolling.

Yes, I did want you to say something to get the argument back on track and YOU FAILED. YOU WERE DEFEATED BY A NEWFAG WHO HAD NEVER HELD A LIGHTSABER!