Ringo and 3 Other Guys

Re: Ringo and 3 Other Guys

Postby Gregs Kite » 28 Aug 2014, 09:33

TheWolf wrote:The Beatles v. Dr. Dre: The Beatles are kind of overrated,


Explain yourself.
You fuckers ruined kite.

Apr 22, 2015 3:49 pm Clayton Bigsby i enjoy sports

BostonSucksMyBalls - Thu May 11, 2017 2:07 pm: greg your being a lil bitch in the hall of sand

Frank the Tank wrote:If I die I leave my red font to Kite.
User avatar
Gregs Kite
Friend of Friends
 
Posts: 21515
Joined: 20 Jan 2007, 15:59
Location: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Re: Ringo and 3 Other Guys

Postby TheWolf » 28 Aug 2014, 09:39

Gregs Kite wrote:
TheWolf wrote:The Beatles v. Dr. Dre: The Beatles are kind of overrated,


Explain yourself.


I actually like a lot of Beatles songs, which may not reconcile very well with my claim that they're overrated. But I'm the opposite of a music goon, whatever the word for that is. So as a general rule I find that any sort of "OMG, these guys changed my life and made the world a better place!" reaction to music is hyperbolic and annoying. And while I was not around in the early 60s to witness it, I believe millions of people felt this way about The Beatles. I enjoy their musical offerings, but I find the historical importance of said offerings to be wildly exaggerated.
"our kayaking guy sucked and came last"
- SGSW
User avatar
TheWolf
Hand-Holder
 
Posts: 16771
Joined: 16 Nov 2004, 08:17
Location: Dead

Re: Ringo and 3 Other Guys

Postby babylurch » 28 Aug 2014, 10:29

TheWolf wrote:
Gregs Kite wrote:
TheWolf wrote:The Beatles v. Dr. Dre: The Beatles are kind of overrated,


Explain yourself.


I actually like a lot of Beatles songs, which may not reconcile very well with my claim that they're overrated. But I'm the opposite of a music goon, whatever the word for that is. So as a general rule I find that any sort of "OMG, these guys changed my life and made the world a better place!" reaction to music is hyperbolic and annoying. And while I was not around in the early 60s to witness it, I believe millions of people felt this way about The Beatles. I enjoy their musical offerings, but I find the historical importance of said offerings to be wildly exaggerated.

A fair case can be made that the BEATles changed the way music was presented (from performers who sang other peoples material to artists who wrote and performed their own shit). But, it is remarkable that there are people who are reporting on their career on a "This is what the Beatles were doing 50 years ago today" basis.
2013 Jason McElwaine Regional Champion
User avatar
babylurch
Basketball Jesus
 
Posts: 4204
Joined: 11 May 2006, 16:07
Location: 2013 Jason McElwaine Regional Champion

Re: Ringo and 3 Other Guys

Postby Iron Mike Sharpe » 28 Aug 2014, 10:31

TheWolf wrote:
Gregs Kite wrote:
TheWolf wrote:The Beatles v. Dr. Dre: The Beatles are kind of overrated,


Explain yourself.


I actually like a lot of Beatles songs, which may not reconcile very well with my claim that they're overrated. But I'm the opposite of a music goon, whatever the word for that is. So as a general rule I find that any sort of "OMG, these guys changed my life and made the world a better place!" reaction to music is hyperbolic and annoying. And while I was not around in the early 60s to witness it, I believe millions of people felt this way about The Beatles. I enjoy their musical offerings, but I find the historical importance of said offerings to be wildly exaggerated.



Yeah, if you're listening to their early 60's stuff, they are overrated. Listen to their late 60's / early 70's stuff, man.
User avatar
Iron Mike Sharpe
Full of good cheer
 
Posts: 17714
Joined: 11 May 2007, 13:07

Re: Ringo and 3 Other Guys

Postby MisterTambourineMan » 28 Aug 2014, 10:38

babylurch wrote:A fair case can be made that the BEATles changed the way music was presented (from performers who sang other peoples material to artists who wrote and performed their own shit).


well....

Image
User avatar
MisterTambourineMan
Now
 
Posts: 11752
Joined: 03 Sep 2006, 14:25
Location: i already told you, won't tell you again

Re: Ringo and 3 Other Guys

Postby CourtesyFlush » 28 Aug 2014, 11:07

Iron Mike Sharpe wrote:Yeah, if you're listening to their early 60's stuff, they are overrated. Listen to their late 60's / early 70's stuff, man.

THIS. The early stuff up until Rubber Soul/Revolver was sugar pop, but after that they really stretched their legs. And they added sitars too!
Gregs Kite - Sat Nov 12, 2011 11:24 pm: I don't know, my Wolfpack can be sneaky good in these games

JichaelDick - Tue Oct 25, 2016 8:47 am: Fulsh, you truly are the best North Carolinian ever. Sorry, Andy Griffith.
User avatar
CourtesyFlush
Friend of Friends
 
Posts: 13803
Joined: 28 Oct 2007, 01:11
Location: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Re: Ringo and 3 Other Guys

Postby TheWolf » 28 Aug 2014, 11:15

CourtesyFlush wrote:
Iron Mike Sharpe wrote:Yeah, if you're listening to their early 60's stuff, they are overrated. Listen to their late 60's / early 70's stuff, man.

THIS. The early stuff up until Rubber Soul/Revolver was sugar pop, but after that they really stretched their legs. And they added sitars too!


I don't know enough to distinguish their songs by album or time period. But as I said in the 'box earlier, I think I'm making less of a "The Bealtes' music is overrated" point and more of a "The importance of The Beatles' music to the world" is overrated. Either that or I'm not making any point at all, which seems far more likely.
"our kayaking guy sucked and came last"
- SGSW
User avatar
TheWolf
Hand-Holder
 
Posts: 16771
Joined: 16 Nov 2004, 08:17
Location: Dead

Re: Ringo and 3 Other Guys

Postby Goobis » 09 Sep 2014, 01:10

TheWolf wrote:
I don't know enough to distinguish their songs by album or time period. But as I said in the 'box earlier, I think I'm making less of a "The Bealtes' music is overrated" point and more of a "The importance of The Beatles' music to the world" is overrated. Either that or I'm not making any point at all, which seems far more likely.


I understand your point here, and concur. I don't think the Beatles music is overrated at all. It is underrated, if anything. But calling it, or any music " important" baffles me. I find that any guy that spouts off about how certain bands, albums, or songs are important can immediately be dismissed as being a complete asshole. Influential? Sure. Important? Fuck you, hipster doofus.
Goobis
Another dude worth meeting
 
Posts: 509
Joined: 11 Feb 2011, 11:54

Re: Ringo and 3 Other Guys

Postby TheWolf » 09 Sep 2014, 09:02

That's what I was trying to say. Should I be bothered by the fact that he agrees with me? #thiscouldbeit
"our kayaking guy sucked and came last"
- SGSW
User avatar
TheWolf
Hand-Holder
 
Posts: 16771
Joined: 16 Nov 2004, 08:17
Location: Dead

Re: Ringo and 3 Other Guys

Postby Gregs Kite » 09 Sep 2014, 09:07

Goobis wrote:
TheWolf wrote:
I don't know enough to distinguish their songs by album or time period. But as I said in the 'box earlier, I think I'm making less of a "The Bealtes' music is overrated" point and more of a "The importance of The Beatles' music to the world" is overrated. Either that or I'm not making any point at all, which seems far more likely.


I understand your point here, and concur. I don't think the Beatles music is overrated at all. It is underrated, if anything. But calling it, or any music " important" baffles me. I find that any guy that spouts off about how certain bands, albums, or songs are important can immediately be dismissed as being a complete asshole. Influential? Sure. Important? Fuck you, hipster doofus.


A band can be important insofar as changing the landscape of popular music, like how Nirvava ushered out hair metal. But that's as important as it gets. I will also grant you life-changing, because almost everything you experience from 13-18 can shape who you are going to be.

But yeah, unless you're the Hoff in Germany, music isn't really ever important.
You fuckers ruined kite.

Apr 22, 2015 3:49 pm Clayton Bigsby i enjoy sports

BostonSucksMyBalls - Thu May 11, 2017 2:07 pm: greg your being a lil bitch in the hall of sand

Frank the Tank wrote:If I die I leave my red font to Kite.
User avatar
Gregs Kite
Friend of Friends
 
Posts: 21515
Joined: 20 Jan 2007, 15:59
Location: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Re: Ringo and 3 Other Guys

Postby Mario Speedwagon » 04 Jan 2015, 10:41

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/ ... e-20130112

Terrible song, it should get a public execution.
#2C4S

Image
User avatar
Mario Speedwagon
Trackies n' Tinnies
 
Posts: 6018
Joined: 21 Oct 2011, 11:04

Re: Ringo and 3 Other Guys

Postby mister bacon » 05 Jan 2015, 13:01

Gregs Kite wrote:But yeah, unless you're the Hoff in Germany, music isn't really ever important.



i disagree with this. music can be important insofar as it becomes indicative of a social or cultural movement (like say hip-hop as the music of urban youth or early rock n roll as indicative of youth culture in the late 50s). the beatles were nice and all, but as time moves forward i'm kind of coming around on the beatles being less important than the rolling stones. yes, it's heresy to say in public. but, ask yourself how often you actually sit around and hear beatles songs just kind of chlling or whatever. the stones music seems much more adaptable to me. you can still play a stones song in a basketball arena to get folks pumped up, or at a house party even today. can't really do that with too many beatles tunes. there's something to that, imo.
2006 SOTSG ESPN March Madness Tourney Challenge Champion
2010 SOTSG NFL Pick 'Em Champion

TheWolf wrote: Being a douche is a very expensive hobby.

ctz31 - Mon Dec 12, 2016 10:30 pm: I'm gonna win a chip w romo. I'm done w blacks. No offense
User avatar
mister bacon
Black on Both Sides
 
Posts: 25563
Joined: 10 Dec 2004, 17:06
Location: "The Real Racist" - Greg's Kite

Re: Ringo and 3 Other Guys

Postby JT99 » 05 Jan 2015, 13:15

mister bacon wrote:
Gregs Kite wrote:But yeah, unless you're the Hoff in Germany, music isn't really ever important.



i disagree with this. music can be important insofar as it becomes indicative of a social or cultural movement (like say hip-hop as the music of urban youth or early rock n roll as indicative of youth culture in the late 50s). the beatles were nice and all, but as time moves forward i'm kind of coming around on the beatles being less important than the rolling stones. yes, it's heresy to say in public. but, ask yourself how often you actually sit around and hear beatles songs just kind of chlling or whatever. the stones music seems much more adaptable to me. you can still play a stones song in a basketball arena to get folks pumped up, or at a house party even today. can't really do that with too many beatles tunes. there's something to that, imo.


If you can't listen to The Beatles anthology and see the drastic changes in the world from the bubblebum pop of the 50's to the revolutionary 60's to the drug-fueled early 70's, then there is nothing left to say.
BigJohnStudd wrote:The original Annie movie from the 80s has a lot of panty shots for a PG rated kids film.


BostonSucksMyBalls wrote:26 Jan 2017 10:53: need the D
User avatar
JT99
Between Bannings
 
Posts: 9000
Joined: 08 Apr 2012, 22:58
Location: Bluesville

Re: Ringo and 3 Other Guys

Postby TVF wannabe » 05 Jan 2015, 13:22

mister bacon wrote:
Gregs Kite wrote:But yeah, unless you're the Hoff in Germany, music isn't really ever important.



i disagree with this. music can be important insofar as it becomes indicative of a social or cultural movement (like say hip-hop as the music of urban youth or early rock n roll as indicative of youth culture in the late 50s). the beatles were nice and all, but as time moves forward i'm kind of coming around on the beatles being less important than the rolling stones. yes, it's heresy to say in public. but, ask yourself how often you actually sit around and hear beatles songs just kind of chlling or whatever. the stones music seems much more adaptable to me. you can still play a stones song in a basketball arena to get folks pumped up, or at a house party even today. can't really do that with too many beatles tunes. there's something to that, imo.

Those 2 sentences are contradictory to me, they're also not mutually exclusive.
User avatar
TVF wannabe
The Bomb Dick
 
Posts: 5417
Joined: 07 Jun 2006, 14:16

Re: Ringo and 3 Other Guys

Postby mister bacon » 05 Jan 2015, 13:32

JT99 wrote:If you can't listen to The Beatles anthology and see the drastic changes in the world from the bubblebum pop of the 50's to the revolutionary 60's to the drug-fueled early 70's, then there is nothing left to say.


oh, i def do and i def agree. i'm not saying that the beatles weren't geniuses or important. i'm simply saying that i'm starting to think that the rolling stones have turned out to be more important and influential than the beatles were. they were the original rock n roll bad boys. they were fucking exiled out of their own country when they made one of the top 3 rock albums of all time. they worked with musicians across the spectrum. they played a hge part in bringing reggae to the mainstream. they even penned what is probably the best 'comeback' album of all time when ppl thought they were washed. they made themselves relevant in the disco/new wave era for fucks sake! their ethos and ourve (look it up, balls) become influential to everyone from billy idol to NWA. that is why i think that, over time, they have slowly become more influential than the beatles.
2006 SOTSG ESPN March Madness Tourney Challenge Champion
2010 SOTSG NFL Pick 'Em Champion

TheWolf wrote: Being a douche is a very expensive hobby.

ctz31 - Mon Dec 12, 2016 10:30 pm: I'm gonna win a chip w romo. I'm done w blacks. No offense
User avatar
mister bacon
Black on Both Sides
 
Posts: 25563
Joined: 10 Dec 2004, 17:06
Location: "The Real Racist" - Greg's Kite

PreviousNext

Return to Music

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest