Originally posted by WrathfulDwarfIt's nonsense.
I have no objection to your book...because to put it simply...it's your book.How about them apples?
If you credit George Harrison with creating Jazz, inventing peanut butter and playing the drums faster than any other woman before him....well, there is nothing to discuss, that is just wrong.
So, how about some apple pie now?
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
my point is, you can't say they didn't suck/did suck as if it's a fact. You liking them doesn't mean they didn't suck, either.-AC
Understood. Your point/logic (rhetorically speaking) is correct. But, let's face it: a band as well liked (still today even) and that has/had this much influence doesn't...can't suck. It just doesn't work that way.
Disliked? Maybe even hated? Sure. People are entitled. To they sucked just doesn't add up.
Originally posted by Bardock42
It's nonsense.If you credit George Harrison with creating Jazz, inventing peanut butter and playing the drums faster than any other woman before him....well, there is nothing to discuss, that is just wrong.
So, how about some apple pie now?
Your example is more like nonsense...because A. You and I and prolly everyone else reading our comments knows it's not true. B. It's wrong thus we can debunk it.
There are lots of MCR fans who happen to think that MCR is the greatest band of this time. I happen to listen to some songs from MCR. I didn't connect nor find their music to be appealing to me. Do I think MCR is the greatest band ever? My answer would be.. I don't know. Would I disagree with the fanbase? Yes and no. Because it's A. their opinion. B. it's their taste.
Do they deserve to be consider great? I dunno. All I know it's that I didn't like their songs.
AC said about The Beatles: "they do not deserve it"
I personally didn't like the MCR music. So why would I say that they do not deserve the recognizition (sp?) that their fanbase give them? I can't.
Would you like whip cream with your pie?
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
False.Nobody talks about their music anywhere near as much as the band themselves.
They didn't, and it's not a matter of wanting to believe it or not. If you want to believe they were the first to do it, do so, you're wrong.
That'd be such a shame...
Point is, people act like music today revolves around them, it doesn't, not musically. They didn't do enough musically for that to be the case.
Personally believe you are Batman if it makes you happy. They're remembered cos of their reputation and because people can't let go. If nobody brought them up, they'd not be anywhere near as considered.
Of course not.
Having an actual impact and influence, lasting or otherwise, in sound, is different to "We/I enjoyed them a lot, they inspired me.". Inspiration doesn't have to be musically, it can be generally.
Eg; you can hear how Led Zeppelin INFLUENCED Wolfmother. Whereas you can only make a connection between Opeth and The Beatles because the lead singer likes them (Inspiration), the music isn't influenced by The Beatles.
They did. If you like them, that's another thing.
I'm joking, but my point is, you can't say they didn't suck/did suck as if it's a fact. You liking them doesn't mean they didn't suck, either.
-AC
You are most incorrect good sir. People today do not lsiten to the beatles consistanly because of the cultural influece they offered 30 years ago. That is most ridiculous infact.
I didnt say the Beatles were the first to play the music they did, but they were the first to bring it to the mainstream and make that style of music recognized...,much like elvis presley
I couldnt agree with you more in saying that the Beatles musical influence is slight, but their music is not enjoyed by music lovers because of their impact 30 years ago. When everyone from that generation is dead. The Beatles music will live on because, simply, it is good music. By your reasoning, a band is only ever remembered depending on their social impact. Led zeppelin, rollingstones and all the other super groups massed so many fans because their music was appealing to so many different people and is still loved today because it is still so appealing. The Beatles are no different. Their popularity at the time makes them a bigger name today for sure, but that isnt going to influence someone today to adopt a band as their favorite.
thanks for the clarification, I now see what you meant by inspiration and influence. There are many bands though, that have been influenced by the Beatles.
You not having enough strength to hold an opinion doesn't mean anything really.
Originally posted by BobbyD
Understood. Your point/logic (rhetorically speaking) is correct. But, let's face it: a band as well liked (still today even) and that has/had this much influence doesn't...can't suck. It just doesn't work that way.Disliked? Maybe even hated? Sure. People are entitled. To they sucked just doesn't add up.
It does, you just refuse to accept anything else.
You are basing your refusal on nothing but love of The Beatles. Being liked or not liked doesn't mean you can or cannot suck, it just is. Your Beatlemaniacal tendancies are flooding your mind again.
-AC
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Your example is more like nonsense...because A. You and I and prolly everyone else reading our comments knows it's not true. B. It's wrong thus we can debunk it.There are lots of MCR fans who happen to think that MCR is the greatest band of this time. I happen to listen to some songs from MCR. I didn't connect nor find their music to be appealing to me. Do I think MCR is the greatest band ever? My answer would be.. I don't know. Would I disagree with the fanbase? Yes and no. Because it's A. their opinion. B. it's their taste.
Do they deserve to be consider great? I dunno. All I know it's that I didn't like their songs.
AC said "they do not deserve it"
I personally didn't like the MCR music. So why would I say that they do not deserve the recognizition (sp?) that their fanbase give them? I can't.
Would you like whip cream with your pie?
Bullshit. The part you quoted he clearly said that the Beatles lovers should stop claiming things that are objectively not true. He wasn't talking about them making the greatest music ... he was specifically referring to scientifically provable facts like "they invented this technique" or "they were the best technical player of the time".
So, yeah, I'd like whipped cream with it and while you are at it get me a coffee, two sugar, no milk.
Originally posted by ragesRemorse
You are most incorrect good sir. People today do not lsiten to the beatles consistanly because of the cultural influece they offered 30 years ago. That is most ridiculous infact.
I didn't actually say that, but go on.
Originally posted by ragesRemorse
I didnt say the Beatles were the first to play the music they did, but they were the first to bring it to the mainstream and make that style of music recognized...,much like elvis presley
I said this, but once again, go on.
Originally posted by ragesRemorse
I couldnt agree with you more in saying that the Beatles musical influence is slight
Then why reply? Are people that sheep-like that they simply have to defend them even if they agree?
Originally posted by ragesRemorse
but their music is not enjoyed by music lovers because of their impact 30 years ago. When everyone from that generation is dead. The Beatles music will live on because, simply, it is good music. By your reasoning, a band is only ever remembered depending on their social impact. Led zeppelin, rollingstones and all the other super groups massed so many fans because their music was appealing to so many different people and is still loved today because it is still so appealing. The Beatles are no different. Their popularity at the time makes them a bigger name today for sure, but that isnt going to influence someone today to adopt a band as their favorite.
I believe those bands live on because of their music, I believe their music held more weight than The Beatles because it did more musically. Led Zeppelin had greater musical influence than The Beatles, The Beatles are name-dropped more than anything. Led Zeppelin came with a relatively new sound, The Beatles didn't.
Originally posted by ragesRemorse
thanks for the clarification, I now see what you meant by inspiration and influence. There are many bands though, that have been influenced by the Beatles.
So? My point was, they are not the most influential band ever, and their musical influence is slight, in the grand scheme of things.
-AC
Originally posted by Bardock42
Bullshit. The part you quoted he clearly said that the Beatles lovers should stop claiming things that are objectively not true. He wasn't talking about them making the greatest music ... he was specifically referring to scientifically provable facts like "they invented this technique" or "they were the best technical player of the time".So, yeah, I'd like whipped cream with it and while you are at it get me a coffee, two sugar, no milk.
The point you're missing is this....
You can't argue agaisn't the fans because that's what fandom does to a person.
Be all objective...it won't work.
Here is your coffee...two teaspoons of sugar, light creme...and napkin.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
The point you're missing is this....You can't argue agaisn't the fans because that's what fandom does to a person.
Be all objective...it won't work.
Here is your coffee...two teaspoons of sugar, light creme...and napkin.
What are you on about? They're void of critique because "that's what fans do"? Do you specialise in wrong arguments or something?
The Beatles were not worthy of certain accolades heaped on them by sensationalistic fans, fact. Ringo Starr was not one of the most skilled drummers ever, none of them were candidates for the most skilled on their instrument, that's a fact. Fans of the band do not get a say in that, it's not about taste.
-AC
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarfO-okay. A point I might have agreed with if it had been brought up before.
The point you're missing is this....You can't argue agaisn't the fans because that's what fandom does to a person.
Be all objective...it won't work.
Here is your coffee...two teaspoons of sugar, light creme...and napkin.
Thank you very much.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You not having enough strength to hold an opinion doesn't mean anything really.It does, you just refuse to accept anything else.
You are basing your refusal on nothing but love of The Beatles. Being liked or not liked doesn't mean you can or cannot suck, it just is. Your Beatlemaniacal tendancies are flooding your mind again.
-AC
Ok AC. In an effort to help you see your trap. I will help you....
I like Prince. You like Prince. Everyone in this music category KNOWS you like Prince. I don't think I like him as much you do, but that is irrelevant. Maybe they don't ALL know that I do like him also, but humor me.....
Prince can't be as accomplished a musician and songwriter and suck. Disliked? Yes. Not in one's taste/preference for music? Sure.
So why is it possible that the condiition for sucking can exist for the Beatles?
My mind is not as flooded as you hope to think it is. I'm trying really hard with you to have a discussion, that doesn't turn into some sort of mud slinging by either of us.
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriThe Beatles were not worthy of certain accolades heaped on them by sensationalistic fans, fact. Ringo Starr was not one of the most skilled drummers ever, none of them were candidates for the most skilled on their instrument, that's a fact. Fans of the band do not get a say in that, it's not about taste.
-AC
So do tell us who is the most skilled drummer ever. Also do explain why that greatest drummer ever have to be prefer over Ringo or any other drummer out there.
In the Guitarist area... I like Chuck Berry over Jimmy Hendrix but not above BB King. So if we use your logic applying it to my taste...Hendrix is more skill than Chuck and BB. Thus I have to like Jimmy over Chuck because of his skill. Well? is that how you want to do it? Greatest must mean I have to like it?
Originally posted by BobbyD
I like Prince. You like Prince. Everyone in this music category KNOWS you like Prince. I don't think I like him as much you do, but that is irrelevant. Maybe they don't ALL know that I do like him also, but humor me.....Prince can't be as accomplished a musician and songwriter and suck. Disliked? Yes. Not in one's taste/preference for music? Sure.
No, you're wrong. In terms of his music, he can "suck" according to taste. Nobody can say with any credibility that he sucks as a musician, but if someone said "He sucks.", as Schecter did about The Beatles, they're not "wrong".
You think that by picking an artist I enjoy I will be blinded and prove myself a hypocrite? No, because that isn't sensible.
The reasons YOU cited for The Beatles factually not "sucking" does not work, because those accolades don't make you factually anything that's relevant.
It's not a fact that they do or do not suck, it's subjective.
Originally posted by BobbyD
So why is it possible that the condiition for sucking can exist for the Beatles?
Because Schecter was speaking subjectively, as it always is for any artist and personal preference from a fan point of view.
If he thinks they suck overall, they suck to him. Their fame and acclaim doesn't afford them some factual protection.
Originally posted by BobbyD
My mind is not as flooded as you hope to think it is. I'm trying really hard with you to have a discussion, that doesn't turn into some sort of mud slinging by either of us.
I'm not mudslinging, but you're yet again trying to objectively claim The Beatles are something they are/are not necessarily. It's entirely opinion.
-AC
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
So do tell us who is the most skilled drummer ever. Also do explain why that greatest drummer ever have to be prefer over Ringo or any other drummer out there.In the Guitarist area... I like Chuck Berry over Jimmy Hendrix but not above BB King. So if we use your logic applying it to my taste...Hendrix is more skill than Chuck and BB. Thus I have to like Jimmy over Chuck because of his skill. Well? is that how you want to do it? Greatest must mean I have to like it?
Wrath, Ringo is not the most skilled drummer ever. Perhps of his era I suppose, but maybe not even then. I like him, but he doesn't come near the top 20 even...ever.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
So do tell us who is the most skilled drummer ever. Also do explain why that greatest drummer ever have to be prefer over Ringo or any other drummer out there.
Haha, you don't get it.
You cannot prefer who is more skilled at something. You may prefer Ringo Starr over Terry Bozzio, but he isn't as skilled, by some multi-verse measured margin, fact.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
In the Guitarist area... I like Chuck Berry over Jimmy Hendrix but not above BB King. So if we use your logic applying it to my taste...Hendrix is more skill than Chuck and BB. Thus I have to like Jimmy over Chuck because of his skill. Well? is that how you want to do it? Greatest must mean I have to like it?
You're a bit silly, as I suspected.
No, that's not the case. You can prefer Chuck Berry's music over Jimi Hendrix's music all you want, TASTE is subjective. You cannot prefer who is more skilled, because someone is either more skilled or they are not. I am not faster than Donovan Bailey, you may prefer my running style, but you cannot prefer me as faster. I simply am not.
You can enjoy whoever's guitar playing more than say...Steve Vai, but you cannot say they are more skilled because you like them more. It doesn't work that way.
-AC
Originally posted by BobbyD
Wrath, Ringo is not the most skilled drummer ever. Perhps of his era I suppose, but maybe not even then. I like him, but he doesn't come near the top 20 even...ever.
But I'm not saying Ringo is the greatest. I'm asking who is more skilled than Ringo.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Haha, you don't get it.You cannot prefer who is more skilled at something. You may prefer Ringo Starr over Terry Bozzio, but he isn't as skilled, by some multi-verse measured margin, fact.
You're a bit silly, as I suspected.
No, that's not the case. You can prefer Chuck Berry's music over Jimi Hendrix's music all you want, TASTE is subjective. You cannot prefer who is more skilled, because someone is either more skilled or they are not. I am not faster than Donovan Bailey, you may prefer my running style, but you cannot prefer me as faster. I simply am not.
-AC
AC don't talk about silly. You're quoting me and addressing BobbyD. But thanks for addressing my question.