Honestly, this doesn't even bite Abbey Road's ankles

Honestly, this doesn't even bite Abbey Road's ankles.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=B-bvtV29Pws
youtube.com/watch?v=rNMJ6-kl8Sk
youtube.com/watch?v=fKp9dHe7Sxg
youtube.com/watch?v=xHDT2NDsbnQ
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

yeah that's a good impression of a pleb OP

This thread is obviously a bait because there is no way that anybody could be stupid enough to believe such a thing.

Except there are more musically interesting things going on in Abbey Road than pet Sounds.

kek

Such as?

both albums are objectively 50% gold and 50% shit. never was there a more equal pair

(You)

That explains literally nothing.

the production.
yeah that's a good impression of a pleb

You're right.
If you have to ask than it just proves you don't know anything about music.

The production and songwriting is far less consistent or special than compared to pet sounds.

Also how's your first week on Sup Forums?

>The production and songwriting is far less consistent or special than compared to pet sounds.
How so?

>the production
Yeah, no.

>If you have to ask than it just proves you don't know anything about music.
Nice one.

Well, this is just wrong. You could argue about the productions, and you wouldn't even be right, but never in a million years would Abbey Road's songwriting be less consisting.

>Come Together
>Maxwell's Silver Hammer
>Octopus's Garden
>Oh Darling!

None of those tracks come close to any song on pet sounds. What does make abbey road special is side two, which also still does not come close to the heights of pet sounds.

>Yeah, no.
How so? Pet Sounds has a muddy, mono mix, while Abbey Road as a very pristine stereo mix
What's wrong with those songs? Be sure to chart it out and illustrate it using music theory terms

abbey road literally has drone on it (i want you) its superior

Pet Sounds has harmonies between the vocals and the variety of instruments that are far more complex than anything The Beatles have done.

Brian Wilson's whole "moving breathing living wall of sound" production is also far more complex than anything The Beatles have done.

Next b8.

Pet Sounds has a fantastic stereo mix you fucking retard. And production isn't just limited to mixing, idiot.

Those songs follow basic, uninteresting song structures with one redeeming factor being the studio trickery George Martin was responsible for.

Why don't you do the same contrarian faggot

You're basing your whole argument on mono vs stereo mixing? Ok friend.

>grandpas fighting grandpas in this thread

Also pet sounds is better

song for song better than any greatest hit compilation they put together. for this type of music that is astonishing.

>Pet Sounds has a fantastic stereo mix you fucking retard.
It came out decades later, the actual album's production is much worse than Abbey Road's.

>Pet Sounds has a fantastic stereo mix you fucking retard.
lol
>And production isn't just limited to mixing, idiot.
What else do you want to discuss about it then?
>Those songs follow basic, uninteresting song structures with one redeeming factor being the studio trickery George Martin was responsible for
Much like those on Pet Sounds, the instrumentation The Wrecking Crew was responsible for
Burden of proof is on you, who made the initial claim.
No. Also the songwriting, emotional multi-dimensionality, scope of intent and production

Pet Sounds and Abbey Road don't compare to each other at all!
Both are glorious but they're totally unique entities.

You made the initial claim the Pet Sounds was inferior to Abbey Road, so the burden proof is on you to prove that claim.

Brian wrote the music retard. Kek.

their not really unique at all both are pop rock albums, with underlying elements of psych pop

pet sounds leans more towards baroque pop and abbey road is more rock, but they are both pop albums

>mono vs. stereo

Pet Sounds was conceived in mono
Abbey Road was conceived in stereo.

>emotional multi-dimensionality
>scope of intent

>the meme in which we pretend this mediocre pop album is some sort of masterpiece

He's not the OP. I am.

pet sounds is barbershop music

youtube.com/watch?v=B-bvtV29Pws
youtube.com/watch?v=rNMJ6-kl8Sk

Thank you

I legit don't understand why this is so worshipped

>stereo means it's better meme

kek

>arguments require muh burden of proof

fuck off to /sci/

The Beatles wrote the music retard
Incorrect. The claim is that OP is wrong. Try again.
Sounds like Abbey Road is inherently superior then
Also how's your first week on Sup Forums?
>Pet Sounds has harmonies between the vocals and the variety of instruments that are far more complex than anything The Beatles have done.
Equaled on Abbey road. Nice try
>Brian Wilson's whole "moving breathing living wall of sound" production is also far more complex than anything The Beatles have done.
The one he stole from Phil Spector?

Because Sup Forums loves to be contrarian, and since The Beatles are too popular, they'll say The Beach Boys are better. Pet Sounds is a solid 7/10. Nothing special at all.

...

>Pet Sounds is a solid 7/10. Nothing special at all.
Is most music a 7/10?

>Equaled on Abbey road
Not even close. I'm starting to think you've never listened to it.

>implying pet sounds isn't critically acclaimed literally everywhere else including Sup Forums

You're the contrarian here.

>a different opinion than mine?
>must be a troll!
Oh I see, you don't know music theory.

Brian Wilson's Wall of Sound was inspired by Phil Spector, not stolen from him. Brian Wilson did it better. Also, by that logic, when the Beatles made Sgt. Peppers, and all albums after Pet Sounds' release, they were stealing from Brian because they were influenced by him. Furthermore, is it not more impressive that one man made Pet Sounds than it is that three wrote Abbey Road, an album which is vastly inferior to Pet Sounds. Finally, claiming that the person who disputes OP's claim has the burden of proof is false. Disputing a claim a claim is valid until the original claim (the one with the burden of proof) is sufficientely substantiated.

>Implying Pet Sounds isn't critically acclaimed in nearly every musical publication and community including Sup Forums

You're delusional.

>equaled on Abbey Road
No they aren't. The only time The Beatles ever came close to achieving that level of harmonization is in A Day In Life and even then they didn't go all the way despite having more instruments than any single Beach Bous track. If anything, Abbey Road is lacking on crazy harmonization.

>the one that he stole from Phil Spector
Spector did a more singular type of wall of sound where the instruments all play the same few notes in that chord and have the same rhythm. Wilson made that wall of sound feel like it's moving around and almost kinda alive by making it more complex with small changes between the notes and rhythms played by the instruments.

lmao

compare a day in the life to barnyard

This sounds like a poor Sgt. Peppers impression. Anyone else feel the same?

He's not delusional. Pet Sounds is acclaimed in nearly every musical publication.

It was a Sgt. Pepper's response, not an impression. Sgt. Pepper's was a response to Pet Sounds.

Surely we can all agree that Revolver kicks Pet Sound's arse

Love both albums

Both are stupid gimmicky shit

Wrong. Sgt. Pepper's is the only album that even came close, and even then it wasn't nearly as good.

Pet Sounds is perhaps the most overrated album ever. It’s a good album, with three incredible songs that are among their best; “God Only Knows,” “Wouldn’t It Be Nice” and “Sloop John B.” “I Know There’s An Answer” almost reaches that level, as does “You Still Believe In Me.” But that’s it. It’s not that the remainder of the songs are poor, it’s just that they’re not all that incredible. Combining that with the somewhat baroque production, you’ve got a very good but very flawed album.

What accounts for the lionization of Pet Sounds? For starters, there’s the story of Brian Wilson, the tortured artiste who battled his own demons and his own band (Mike Love fought him all the way on it) in making the record. Then, after producing Pet Sounds, he finally cracked up, a victim of too many drugs and trying to top Sgt. Pepper. It’s the kind of stuff that myths are made of, and it’s an irresistible story line. Secondly, there are Wilson’s production skills – which have been blown all out of proportion. (Wilson’s true production moment of genius was “Good Vibrations.”) Brian Wilson was a great producer, but listening to Pet Sounds you hear the heavy influence of the true master producer of the era – Phil Spector. Wilson literally worshipped Spector and learned everything from him. Reading lots of the over the top rubbish about the production on Pet Sounds, where Spector’s name is barely ever mentioned, you come to realize that there are a lot of people in the world who no clue as to Spector’s influence on Wilson. (The Wrecking Crew, Spector’s house band, played on many Beach Boys’ songs). And finally, the record was a (relative) commercial failure at upon release. So then the narrative becomes the misunderstood genius that is underappreciated after he becomes a “serious artist.” If you were going to write a indie rock biblical fable, it doesn’t get any better than that.

...

>trying to top Sgt. Pepper
This is where it completely falls apart. Nice try though.

objectively and totally wrong

youtube.com/watch?v=fKp9dHe7Sxg
youtube.com/watch?v=xHDT2NDsbnQ

Most people that read the Wikipedia page on Pet Sounds know that Phil Spector was an influence of Brian.

you either don't know what drone is or haven't listened to i want you (she's so heavy).
also, are you saying a simple drone would be better in your eyes than complex song structure and instrumentation?

true

>Brian Wilson's Wall of Sound was inspired by Phil Spector, not stolen from him.
Then why was Brian Wilson so paranoid of Spector after literally saying he stole is sound?
>Brian Wilson did it better
Prove it.
>Also, by that logic, when the Beatles made Sgt. Peppers, and all albums after Pet Sounds' release, they were stealing from Brian because they were influenced by him
Also by this logic, when Brain made Pet Sounds, and all albums after Rubber Soul's release, they were stealing from The Beatles because he was influenced by them
>. Furthermore, is it not more impressive that one man made Pet Sounds
Untrue. There were between five and six Beach Boys, as well as The Wrecking Crew providing instrumentation. Also Brian needed a professional songwriter to write the lyrics. It wasn't a "one man album". >Disputing a claim a claim is valid until the original claim (the one with the burden of proof) is sufficientely substantiated.
This claim was not substantiated.

Nice try.
>level of harmonization
What does this mean?
>Spector did a more singular type of wall of sound where the instruments all play the same few notes in that chord and have the same rhythm
Show 30 examples of this please.
How are you measuring this?

Really? Really?

/thread

You're a relentless troll, I'll give you that.

>Prove it.
>not substantiated
>Show 30 examples of this please
>How are you measuring this?

lel

>what does this mean?
I already told you. The fact that you said that AR equaled it knew what you're talking about.

>show 30 examples
All of Pet Sounds and that one Phil Spector greatest hits album?

That list is clearly then, too. There is no way that people think ZOSO and Loveless are as good as Pet Sounds. Trolls, all of them.

>RYM ratings

>I already told you
Where? Quote me.
>All of Pet Sounds and that one Phil Spector greatest hits album?
Not going to work. You made specific claims of instrumentation following a simple one note phrase with no polyrhythm. Show me this. I have a feeling you don't know what you are talking about, and haven't heard anything by Phil Specter.

22 thousand votes don't lie. A barbershop quartet with overdubbed violins aren't everyone's cup of tea.

friendly reminder that Blonde on Blonde is better than both of them

based scaruffi right as always

Also by this logic, when Brain made Pet Sounds, and all albums after Rubber Soul's release, they were stealing from The Beatles because he was influenced by them
I was disputing your logic, not using it.
hen why was Brian Wilson so paranoid of Spector after literally saying he stole is sound?
Because Brian Wilson respect Spector and was a very paranoid man.
Untrue. There were between five and six Beach Boys, as well as The Wrecking Crew providing instrumentation. Also Brian needed a professional songwriter to write the lyrics. It wasn't a "one man album".
The other Beach Boys were only used for vocals, and I think Carl played a bit of guitar. The Wrecking Crew did not write anything, they only played instruments. Do you expect Brian to be a one-man orchestra? That "proffesional songwriter", by his own admission, only communicated Brian's thoughts. Also, I was talking about composition, not lyrics.

>quote me
>equaled by Abbey Road

>not going to work
>damage controlling this hard
Hahahahaha bitch boy going full delusional with all the proof in front of him.

I HAD TO PROVE THAT I COULD MAKE IT ALONE NOW BUT THAT'S NOT ME

>I was disputing your logic, not using it.
Poor job of it, as you can see. It works against you
>That "proffesional songwriter", by his own admission, only communicated Brian's thoughts. Also, I was talking about composition, not lyrics.
It's not a song without lyrics.
>proof
Still waiting for it. Maybe you don't know what "harmonization" means.

>waiting for it
>pulling "I know I am wrong on Sup Forums so I'll b8 with muh specific proof"
>the most basic form of Sup Forums damage control
>being this new

I WANTED TO SHOW HOW INDEPENDENT I'D GROWN NOW BUT THAT'S NOT ME

Making art into a sport is the hallmark of small minds.

>The Beatles wrote the music retard
the first statement is that much of the credit is due to george martin's mixing, in wich the beatles had no hand on. then you tried to refused that crediting the orchestra (or whomever) with the melodys on pet sound but the credit is on brian while the stuff that martin did is all martin's creativity

music theory has nothing to do with it. abbey road is characteristically lacking backup vocals (wich would be the vocal melodys we're refering to)

this

they're both great, just enjoy the music

this isn't the real instrumental. Listen to the drum fills, they're different to the original

I'm not that guy, but that doesn't even matter. The thread is not The Beatles vs The Beach Boys. It's Abbey Road vs Pet Sounds, and if George Martin's production is the best out of the two, than that's a poitn to Abbey Road, as simples as that.

This

i agree pet sounds is the best album as far as im concerned

>"Abbey Road is lacking on crazy harmonization."
Ever listen to Because?

>melodys

Nice non argument
Nice goalpost shifting
>music theory has nothing to do with it
I don't think you understand music theory