Oasis, Mc Fly, Eminem, Arctic Monkeys, bla bla...
 

... you think they are big? :lol1:

For all those too young to know about the Beatles check out this programme:

Timewatch: Beatlemania BBC2 at 9:00pm

"By 1966 the Beatles had played over 1,400 gigs, toured the world four times and sold the equivalent of 200 million records. "

Now that's BIG :thumb: Find out why....

Come on, who else is convinced that UB and PSL are one and the same !

Not that many tours of the USA though ;):D

Two sides of the same coin perhaps... but that's all.

Where is the smelly old git anyway? :wonder:

Amazing really... :notworthy

The Best Band this World Will Ever See:notworthy: People will Still be listening to The Beatles in 50 Years time:notworthy:
Cheers
Colin

bloody hell the "beatles" next you will be going on abput elvis :p sure they were good in thier day but cmon !!! modern groups are better and the sound quality is in a different league :p there isnt as many record sales etc as there is far too much choice for entertaimment, plus now why would you travel miles to see a group when they do a great tv concert!! something you never got all those years ago

LOL - you don't know much do you? It's all about 'sound quality' is it? :thumb:

stevebt: ever been to a Bootleg Beatles concert ? Don't knock it 'till you've tried it.
Yve

no!! but my mate goes to the elvis ones all the time and he says they are friggin excllent !! living in the past for the beatles aint gonna make everyone appreciate them more :D beethoven has been around longer and i bet he has made more cash and has a bigger following ;) horses for courses

Been to the Elvis "live" concert. Not bad actually. :)

Sgt Peppers is an aural pleasure if you can get a decent unmolested LP on a decent setup. Remasters on CD seemed have lost that magic zing.

And normally I don't like record either :wonder:

Why is it that Elvis impersonators always choose to emulate the "too many burgers, diamante jump-suit, facial buggers' grips" phase of Elvis's life? :D

It's all about the "performance".....

As they slurr "my way" whilst fumbling for the lyrics that were scribbled down on a hotel notepad 10minutes beforehand in the dressing room. ;)

We may not have the orginal FAB FOUR BUT the BOOTLEG BEATLES are the Mutts Nutts saw them and met them at one of their open air concerts a few years back, and don't talk about living in the past with music, If it had not been for the Beatles their would be no Oasis, etc, some of todays music is abousoultly crap.
Cheers
Colin

Possibly the most misguided post ever... :freak3:

Shame that they were still sh1te. There is NO doubt however, that they were in the right place and time (in history) - the music scene was in dire need of something new.
They were pioneers for their time and shaped pretty much all of the music we hear today.

But let's face facts: prior to The Beatles, the standard wasn't exactly high though was it?

You had a group of adequate musicians and two who could pen a tune. Lennon more than McCartney.
The driving force behind The Beatles was Sir George Martin. Simple. HE was their sound.
HE was the reason why their music was so long-lasting. Genius.
Of potential further intrest, I had the pleasure of working with a chap who used to be one of the assistant engineers on The Beatles stuff (he also was involved in the design of Dolby's noise reduction system! :cool: ), fascinating chap to talk to.

As an artist, overrated. As a concept - genius.

Dan :) (all imho ;)

Could pen a tune in ten minutes and earn them millions, YOU tell me of another song writing partnership that could do this, and Yes Sir George Martin:notworthy: was the man behind them and his input helped them massively, but their song writing talent was way ahead of anyone's time, if you need to be more conviced listen to the new album Love, in which Sir George and Son Giles both said that The Beatles were well ahead of their time.
Cheers
Colin

Jagger and Richards.
Elton John and Bernie Taupin

The Stones were much better musicians - Charlie Watts for example is an extremely accomplished jazz drummer as well and definitely had more influence on later rock rhythms that the Ringo.

As above really.
Iv'e got the new album as well - it sounds technically amazing (and yes, I'm qualified to comment too ;) )

And as you say - they were way ahead of anybody - hence my comment about the standard not exactly being very high though ;)

In defence of the poster, there haven't been any bands as ground-breaking, as technology has got in the way of music (imho) - we use the technology because we can, not because we should..... but this is a different arguement ;) :D

Dan

OK Point taken, But do you know of any other band who has held chart positions from 1 to 5 all at the same time, Oh and number 1 in the album charts too:D
Cheers
Colin

You cannot be serious!! :eek: Quality of musicianship was far higher higher prior to the 60s simply because most artists and performers crafted their skills live without the benefits of multirack recording (beyond 4 tracks) and fancy post production techniques. Also the quality of song writing and performance was far better before 'pop groups' evolved.

Have a listen to some 50s compilations if you get chance and you will be astounded at the quality of the vocals and instrumentalists. All recorded in a single take. You will also be blown away by the sheer technical quality of the audio engineering given that it was all analogue and valve driven.

LOL - name one, just one, Stones or Bum Bandit songs that could even hold a candle (in the wind or ortherwise) to songs like Norwegian Wood or Penny Lane

(and that's without even mentioning the Beatles main catalogue) ;)

:)

I saw the Elvis concert too at the MEN, I went out of a technical curiosity more than anything, I was reasonably impressed, apparently you can now see more of the same with Frank Sinatra

Agreed on Sgt Peppers, made sure I got me a damn good vinyl version too :D

Oh and those comparing Ringo, no one ever said Ringo was good ;)

LED ZEPPELIN!
sory boys but some zeppelin concerts made a million dollars a night!
as a musician i love what the beatles did but zeppelin all the way for me!

That's ridiculous - the Stones have many songs of that calibre.

You were either a Beatles fan or a Stones fan, you could not be both, mind you in my collection now I have them all, but when i started collecting music The Beatles came first and always will do.:D
Cheers
Colin