The beach boys are better than the beatles

the beach boys are better than the beatles

discuss

Other urls found in this thread:

noisey.vice.com/en_ca/article/there-are-some-totally-legit-reasons-to-hate-the-beatles
noisey.vice.com/en_us/article/shut-your-dumb-stupid-mouth-about-the-beatles-being-overrated
recmusicbeatles.com/public/files/awp/aditl.html
youtube.com/watch?v=PUK2WhPwi3E
youtube.com/watch?v=Um3MhkU0u7k
musicformaniacs.blogspot.ca/2014/09/100-copies-of-beatles-white-album.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>3 good albums
>12 good albums

The Beatles are more consistently amazing but the Beach Boys have 2 or 3 albums better than anything the Beatles did

Beach Boys fans are shit compared to Beatles fans.

yeah true
i don't know, the beatles were great songwriters but i just don't like them! they're boring!

>boring
>dadpop thread
wew, I was trying not to stereotype you but you just fulfilled the strawman

This. The lows of the beatles are still higher than the lows of the beach boys but the highs of the beatles are lower than the highs of the beach boys

i don't yo like i just listened to pet sounds again and it's such a fucking beautiful album
and like when i think of the beatles, they're like a band possessed by the Man, you know? like, "revolution," which is against revolution. "hard day's night," which is about working and coming home to your partner. it's just so ideological. i think they're reptilians. it's reptilian music for and by reptilians

Yeah the Beatles always feel like a weird experiment to me the more I think about it.

>two amazing songwriters with contrasting personalities as well as contrasting songwriting approaches which balance each other out
>the underdog "little brother" who becomes an extremely proficient songwriter and contributor to the group
>the fun loving drummer
>from a working class town, playing for hours and hours on end at bars to make a name for yourself
>everybody is friends with each other, all of those clips of them joking with each other and being best buds, even when being interviewed
>most if not all of the band members are blazing hot/cute
>take the world by storm, literally become the biggest band on the planet within a year and a half of their debut album
>quit touring literally because too many people show up every time and they can't hear themselves play over the cheering
>that gradual but very certain growth as songwriters, musicians, and innovators
>one of the best living producers in music next to Brian Wilson and Phil Spector working exclusively for them
>end your career on a song cycle concluded by a track literally called "The End" which is by far the most hollywood-tier break up a band has ever seen

The more I think about it the more I'm convinced that this band never actually existed and aliens just visited us and made boomers think the Beatles were real and now, as children, we just believe what we've been told and what's in the books.

kinks>beatles>beach boys desu

yeah, it just seems too perfect. that's what makes it boring. it's not even music, it's a religion. "beatlemania". fuck it. fuck them. i hate it. i hate them. i hate the beatles. i hate what they represent. i hate the conservative fucks who love the beatles. i hate their mythology. i hate their boring pop songs. i hate how they dropped acid once and it's this immortal fucking thing. i hate how they smoke weed and it defines a counter-culture. i hate how their "counter-culture" is bullshit and explicitly anti-marxist. i hate how they are music by sheeps for sheeps. don't get me wrong. their music is good. their music is influential. i like the beatles individually. i like the beatles. but i hate what they represent. i hate the boomers who love the beatles. i hate their little sheep children who listen to and identify with the beatles, and think it's some sort of liberated counter-culture, and go on to conform to the neoliberal agenda. i hate how everyone loves the fucking beatles. i don't know. i don't dislike the beatles. i dislike people who like the beatles. and people who like david bowie. douchebags. the beatles wrote some great, near-perfect pop songs. i don't know. i'm listening to them again, now. maybe i need to really listen to their entire discography before passing judgement on them. maybe i've been too much of an edge lord to ever really listen to the beatles. maybe i've never really listened to the beatles before. and maybe i've never fucking wanted to

>the Beach Boys have 2 or 3 albums better than anything the Beatles did
>the highs of the beatles are lower than the highs of the beach boys
I'm fan of both but for me it's pretty obvious that the highs of The Beatles are way ahead of anything The Beach Boys ever did.

60s counter-culture is bullshit. counter-culture is hypocritical bullshit. fuck the british.

what is the beatles equivalent to good vibrations

This is so autistic I can't even comprehend it.

It's very innovative and original song, I admit that but it has really fucking aged as well

that's exactly it, user. stupid fucks like you are the type of people who like the beatles. boring, normal music for boring, normal people

the beatles are the soundtrack of the neoliberal bourgoise

Jokes on you, I don't even like the beatles.

well you're still a stupid fuck

I kind of agree. They're too ideal and their fans are lucky and it makes me a little jealous and angry. I hate their image and how much I'm inclined to love it. I hate seeing them in interviews being all lovable and sweet and catching myself giggling at a comment by John or a funny face Paul makes. Drives me nuts.

>"jealous"
Grow the fuck up

hahah i don't know. i don't like the beatles, i'm not a beatles fan. i guess i feel sort of left out, because i never got into the beatles, because they're boring mainstream music. i got into noise music when i was 13. i didn't listen to the beatles. i just hate how everyone loves the beatles. it's insufferable! they just love them because other people love them! and nobody really loves them! so it's a cult-like religion of copycats! a part of history, for some bizarre reason!

everybody loves the beatles, and nobody loves me!

jealousy. that's exactly it, though. i'm a musician, too. i hate being compared to members of the beatles instead of appreciated in my own right by beatles fans.

bollocks mate Pet Sounds is the perfect statement of pop music, the Beatles never got close to anything similar despite their best efforts. And that's without getting into Smile, the Beatles were never as in-touch with their cultural context or as ambitious in what they were doing. The Beatles never got close to something like Surfs Up.

american beatles fans are some of the worst people on the planet

there are no british beatles fans now. the beatles have just become cultural background noise, like pollution.

>Yeah the Beatles always feel like a weird experiment to me the more I think about
they were incredibly formulaic.

beefheart > beach boys > beatles

>I'm fan of both but for me it's pretty obvious that the highs of The Beatles are way ahead of anything The Beach Boys ever did.
horrible opinon

do the beatles actually have any good songs beyond i am the walrus and maybe helter skelter?

>they were incredibly formulaic.

That's not what I mean.

noisey.vice.com/en_ca/article/there-are-some-totally-legit-reasons-to-hate-the-beatles

>the Beatles were never as in-touch with their cultural context
Neither were The Beach Boys
>The Beatles never got close to something like Surfs Up.
I read the news today, oh boy...

>if it's not weird/"experimental", it's not good!

noisey.vice.com/en_us/article/shut-your-dumb-stupid-mouth-about-the-beatles-being-overrated

>I read the news today, oh boy...

it's pretty pathetic that this is the one point of comparison you can make considering how harmonically and instrumentally infantile that song is. the structure is pretty cool and the orchestra bit is excellent but it wasn't even the beatles who did it, paul had an idea of it and george martin hired musicians for him to just say "Hey guys play really loudly for 32 measures" while probably pretending to conduct. a day in the life is fantastic and one of the beatles' best songs but it does not hold a candle to surf's up.

>it's pretty pathetic that this is the one point of comparison you can make considering how harmonically and instrumentally infantile that song is.
Not really. See recmusicbeatles.com/public/files/awp/aditl.html
>but it wasn't even the beatles who did it, paul had an idea of it and george martin hired musicians for him to just say "Hey guys play really loudly for 32 measures" while probably pretending to conduct. a day in the life is fantastic and one of the beatles' best songs but it does not hold a candle to surf's up.
By this logic, it wasn't really Brian who did Surf's Up since he had someone else write the lyrics and session musicians play the song. And he couldn't even finish the song anyways.

First, why does that website straight lift from Alan Pollack's actual website?

Second, linking his analysis of a song doesn't make it complex or worth analysing. The only points worth making, which he makes, are relative to the structure of the song, which I've said is pretty impressive and unique. But you'll notice he doesn't actually make any comments about weird chord progressions or nondiatonic harmonies or unusual rhythms or anything. That's because there are none. Like I said, harmonically, the song is simple. It's a pop song dressed up to be avant garde because they added in the orchestra crescendo and put two unrelated songs together, which again, was a marvel idea at the time but hasn't aged well.

>By this logic, it wasn't really Brian who did Surf's Up since he had someone else write the lyrics and session musicians play the song. And he couldn't even finish the song anyways.

But the ideas were all his, whereas with the Beatles it was just Paul and George who carried the torch. Without their ideas and executions ADitL would be a very run of the mill Beatles song. Pleasant but uninteresting, and not at all befitting of the praise it receives. At least Brian thought of Surf's Up all on his own.

brian wilson is a genius. non of the beatles were or are geniuses

>But you'll notice he doesn't actually make any comments about weird chord progressions or nondiatonic harmonies or unusual rhythms or anything
weird chord changes =/= good
The *right* chord change = good
>But the ideas were all his
As the ideas for A Day in the Life were The Beatles.

What's with Brianfags and their double standards?
youtube.com/watch?v=PUK2WhPwi3E
WOW AMAZING GENIUS

lmao it's so good

>weird chord changes =/= good
>The *right* chord change = good

Good thing Surf's Up has both.

Regardless of whether or not you actually care about music being complex, it's objectively more difficult to compose a song like Surf's Up with difficult, unorthodox progressions which still sound good, than it is to compose a song like A Day in the Life, which uses diatonic chords in a typical and predictable fashion. It's not better, it's not worse, it's just more impressive.

>As the ideas for A Day in the Life were The Beatles.

Nope. George and Ringo had zero input on ADitL. John didn't have input on the orchestra bit or Paul's little middle section. None of them went out of the way to hire the orchestra like Brian went out of his way to hire the Wrecking Crew. Get real, duder.

Also nice strawman. I don't even like the Beach Boys but anyone who knows a lick of music theory would appreciate the harmonic structure of Surf's Up. Even Leonard Bernstein recognized its compositional prowess, which is saying a lot.

BB had a subtext of manic depression that hypnotizes you. You spend time thinking about the songs to help resolve the mixed feelings of upbeat music and depressing vocal delivery. Even the annoying Christmas songs were evil underneath.

youtube.com/watch?v=Um3MhkU0u7k

>sound good,
This is subjective thus irrelevant. The chord sequence in Surf's up is dizzying, convoluted and outputting. It's poorly composed.

>Nope. George and Ringo had zero input on ADitL. John didn't have input on the orchestra bit or Paul's little middle section
Oh were they not members of the Beatles?

>it's pretty obvious
Stopped reading right there, your opinion is shit and you should stop browsing Sup Forums right now.

yeah! that's exactly it! the evil is totally existential. the beatles were just idiots.

i got real drunk and in a fight the other weekend and really liked that song upon revisiting pet sounds today

>the beatles were just idiots.
>i got real drunk and in a fight the other weekend

>This is subjective thus irrelevant. The chord sequence in Surf's up is dizzying, convoluted and outputting. It's poorly composed.

Nice job talking out of your ass. Keep pretending to know music theory. The chords behind Surf's Up work perfectly and follow all of the traditional western rules of voice leading and harmonic resolution.

>Oh were they not members of the Beatles?

Claiming the ideas behind that song came from the Beatles implies the entire band and the band alone, which is deceptive and false. It's one member of the band plus their producer who thought of the one single idea which makes ADitL more than just a pretty acoustic guitar driven pop song.

it was my birthday weekend ok
i never get drunk and in fights anymore!

>If it's an opinion I don't like, it's talking out of your ass
>but my opinion is not
Yikes
>Keep pretending to know music theory
Well you can ask the members in the several groups I play in. But nice ad hominem anyways
>The chords behind Surf's Up work perfectly
As do A Day In The Life. Whether they are simpler or not is relevant. complex =/= better
>Claiming the ideas behind that song came from the Beatles implies the entire band and the band alone
You are grasping for straws now. I could use a similar logic for "The beach boys" since Brian was not the only Beach Boy. Who thought of what is not relevant. They were a unit.
You sound like an unintelligent hooligan

>Whether they are simpler or not is relevant
*is not relevant

Don't get too excited with your reply.

it was my birthday weekend, and yeah i definitely felt like an idiot for blowing all my money on booze and getting in a fight, but i was turning 25 and depressed as fuck

>Neither were the Beach Boys

have you listened to Smile at all? it's literally an attempt to make the Great American Album, it directly deals with the British Invasion and the American sense of self during the Vietnam War and the growth of the counterculture. The Beatles never acknowledged any of that sort of stuff on anymore than a superficial level.

>I read the news today, oh boy...

Anyone who thinks Surf's Up and ADITL are comparable likely doesn't actually understand what Surf's Up is about or why it's good.

>Yikes

You aren't stating an opinion by saying the chord progression "does not work". Saying "I don't like it" is an opinion but you're implying that the chord progression doesn't adhere to the rules of western theory and it does. It objectively "works", but it's up to the listener as to whether or not it "sounds good". Understand?

>Well you can ask the members in the several groups I play in. But nice ad hominem anyways

You can make music and be in bands without knowing theory. Ask the Beatles.

>As do A Day In The Life. Whether they are simpler or not is relevant. complex =/= better

Broken record. I've explained this before, unorthodox progressions that adhere to the rules of western theory despite being extremely unusual, off kilter, and unusual (especially for the time they are written) is much much more difficult that writing a song that adheres to traditional or typical chord progressions. If you like your simple chord progressions because they work then you should like Surf's Up's complicated chord progressions because they work too. Maybe you don't like them. Then okay. But Surf's Up is still vastly superior compositionally on every measures besides a subjective one, and I'm not here to discuss opinions.

>You are grasping for straws now. I could use a similar logic for "The beach boys" since Brian was not the only Beach Boy. Who thought of what is not relevant. They were a unit.

Except I never claimed that Surf's Up is by the Beach Boys because it's not. It's by Brian Wilson and Van Dyke Parks, the two lone people who wrote the entirety of the music, and the Wrecking Crew (who Brian hired) play on it and the Beach Boys sing on it. I'm giving the song the correct credits unlike you.

>have you listened to Smile at all?
Which version?
>it's literally an attempt to make the Great American Album,
And it failed.
>it directly deals with the British Invasion and the American sense of self during the Vietnam War and the growth of the counterculture.
How does Wonderful or Surf's Up fit into that?
>doesn't actually understand what Surf's Up is about
Explain it.

>You aren't stating an opinion by saying the chord progression "does not work".
I am. It's an opinion that it doesn't work.
>you're implying
Strawman. Watch it.
>but it's up to the listener as to whether or not
So why argue with me then?
>You can make music and be in bands without knowing theory. Ask the Beatles.
Since I'm discussing theory right now, it's logical to conclude I do.
>much much more difficult
Not relevant. difficult =/= better
>But Surf's Up is still vastly superior
>I'm not here to discuss opinions.
Then why did you just state an opinion?
>Except I never claimed that Surf's Up is by the Beach Boys because it's not
Pic related. It is a Beach Boys song, from the album Surf's Up by The Beach Boys. If you want to pretend it isn't, then you need to ignore George martin's contributions to ADITL and look at it as a Lennon/Mecca composition

But you won't, because you need to have a double standard to be correct. I don't care if you like one over the other, but just be honest that you are stacking the deck to make one look better than the other.

>Anyone who thinks Surf's Up and ADITL are comparable likely doesn't actually understand what Surf's Up is about or why it's good.
>m-muh consept
Consept doesn't make the music better objectively you twat.

>I am. It's an opinion that it doesn't work.

If you mean it doesn't "work" as in it doesn't work in your head or sound good to you or something then we have no disagreement here. But if you're going to imply that it doesn't "work" as in it breaks rules or objectively sounds bad then we're going to have some contention.

>Strawman. Watch it.

I'm making a logical assumption based on your rhetoric, but I apologize for the incorrect leap in logic.

>So why argue with me then?

Because you were implying that these two songs are on the same level compositionally and they simply are not. Structurally, maybe even, maybe ADitL gets an edge. Lyrically, that's subjective. Melodically, also subjective. Harmonically, rhythmically, instrumentally, Surf's Up is absolutely more fleshed out and thought out.

>Since I'm discussing theory right now, it's logical to conclude I do.

You aren't discussing theory, you're bullshitting. You linked some random website that stole a page from Alan Pollack's Notes On series and have been making vague statements this entire time.

>Not relevant. difficult =/= better

Difficult doesn't mean better with regards to the listener's appreciation, but it certainly means better with regards to compositional quality.

Why do people only do this with music? Nobody is going to argue that the prose of Stephanie Meyer is on par with Nabokov but people will say that a song adhering to familiar, comfortable musical language can be compositionally on par with something like Surf's Up. It boggles the mind.

>Pic related. It is a Beach Boys song, from the album Surf's Up by The Beach Boys.

Irrelevant. I never credited to the Beach Boys because I know that song credits are legal mumbo jumbo and sometimes do not reflect the actual artists. You're grasping at straws now.

>Lyrically, that's subjective. Melodically, also subjective. Harmonically, rhythmically, instrumentally, Surf's Up is absolutely more fleshed out and thought out.
You're kidding right?

I am literally not.

Look, I have no problem if you're the kind of guy who would argue that Lolita is inferior to Twilight in terms of use of the English language. But if you're one of the people who whips out the "muh subjectivity" only with regards to music, one of the people who refuses to acknowledge when one song exercises an objectively superior grasp and knowledge and comfort of musical ideas over another but is willing to accept or even BE a snob about film, literature, and other forms of art, then we have a problem. Speaking of double standards, this is one I cannot stomach.

> But if you're going to imply
Strawman. Watch it.
>I apologize for the incorrect leap in logic.
I accept your apology
>Because you were implying that these two songs are on the same level compositionally
Yet another strawman. I compared the songs because they are both meant as the epic finales to the albums both artist were making around the same time frame, in similar genres. They are conceptually the same and serve the same purposes on their respective projects.
>Difficult doesn't mean better with regards to the listener's appreciation, but it certainly means better with regards to compositional quality
[citation needed]
>Irrelevant. I never credited to the Beach Boys
Yet you want to criticize The Beatles as a group to strengthen your argument?

Double standard.
Not him, but calm down. A Day In The Life demonstrates that Lennon had a grasp of what he was doing with a I-v6/4-vi-IV-ii-V sequence that then modulated to a I-v6/4-vi--flat-II-i for the second half of the verse, all with excellent voice leading. Both ADITL and Surf's Up are great.

>Strawman. Watch it.

That was a hypothetical. It was clear by that point that you are not making that statement.

>Yet another strawman.

Were you not ? Because that seems to very heavily imply that ADITL is comparable to Surf's Up in terms of quality, not in terms of concept or context.

>Yet you want to criticize The Beatles as a group to strengthen your argument?

I never criticized the Beatles as a group. I made the correct statement that ADITL is less a song by the Beatles and more a song by John with some novel ideas by Paul, mostly executed by George Martin. Crediting the band with it is misleading as crediting the Beach Boys with Surf's Up is misleading.

>It was clear by that point that you are not making that statement.
So you've been consciously holding me to a statement you know I didn't make?
>Because that seems to very heavily imply
More of your arguments based on petty strawmen?
>mostly executed by George Martin
Not relevant.
>Crediting the band with it is misleading as crediting the Beach Boys with Surf's Up is misleading.
Not really. It was the band who completed the song in 1971 by editing Brina's unfinished first movement onto his demo for movement 2, and then adding more elements to the ending which included the brilliant reprise which creates the unifying concept and completes the morality tale of SMiLE.

>Not him, but calm down. A Day In The Life demonstrates that Lennon had a grasp of what he was doing with a I-v6/4-vi-IV-ii-V sequence that then modulated to a I-v6/4-vi--flat-II-i for the second half of the verse, all with excellent voice leading. Both ADITL and Surf's Up are great.

Oh, I forgot about this.

I wouldn't say Brian OR John knew what they were doing since they literally didn't know theory but they certainly had some mighty intuition. I would say it's pretty clear that Brian has *more* intuition, because Surf's Up is miles ahead in terms of complexity than ADITL and it would be an exercise to compose something that intricate even if you were a well informed student of theory. ADITL's progression is pretty elementary to someone who knows theory.

>So you've been consciously holding me to a statement you know I didn't make?

In that post, yeah. Not to be argumentative necessarily, just to further clarify my stance when I thought you were making that statement. Basically noise I would say were we having this discussion in person, weird habit.

>More of your arguments based on petty strawmen?

You never made you arguments clear from the beginning, so excuse me. Your claim that ADITL and Surf's Up are comparable because of their placement on the album literally came up 50 posts into our discussion. If you made your theses clear from the word "go" we wouldn't be having these problems.

>Not relevant.

Perfectly relevant. It goes both ways too. Crediting Surf's Up to the Beach Boys is stupid for the same reasons crediting ADITL to the Beatles is stupid.

>Not really. It was the band who completed the song in 1971 by editing Brina's unfinished first movement onto his demo for movement 2...

Nice knowledge flex, sort of. It was pretty much just Carl though, so still misleading to credit the entire band. By then it's like Brian/Carl/Van Dyke Parks, much like how ADITL is John/Paul/George Martin. That's a fun parallel, actually.

Are you telling me 'Please Please Me' was a good album?

>and then adding more elements to the ending which included the brilliant reprise which creates the unifying concept and completes the morality tale of SMiLE.

He came up with that btw, not Carl or any other member.

>"a slightly disheveled-looking Brian, his belly hanging out of his pajamas, stormed inside... [and] announced that they needed to add something to the final movement of 'Surf's Up'" -- a missing lyrical couplet and intricate vocal coda.

>all this stuff are some of the reasons why they are considered to be the greatest of all time
>but no it has to be a conspiracy nothing like this could ever happen

A Day in the Life

>ADITL's progression is pretty elementary to someone who knows theory.
You just admitted neither of them did, so this is Not relevant

And as I said, "elementary" is fine. The point is communication with the audience and how to succeed in that, not "complexity". You should ask yourself-- who was better at communicating in this example: John/Paul with ADITL or Brian/Van with Surf's Up?
>In that post, yeah. Not to be argumentative necessarily, just to further clarify my stance when I thought you were making that statement. Basically noise I would say were we having this discussion in person, weird habit.
So this is how you act in person? Must be a lonely life!
>You never made you arguments clear from the beginning, so excuse me.
You didn't ask. You just went straight to the strawmen and ad hominems
>Perfectly relevant.
Then we should credit Chuck Britz and The Wrecking Crew as well.
>He came up with that btw, not Carl or any other member.
This was recently called into question as more perpetuation of "Eccentric Genius Brian" mythos by a number of first-hand sources. Also note there are NO evidence of those lyrics existing in 1966/1967 by Van or acetates or demos.

You know My name (Look Up The Number)

>never as in-touch with their cultural context

Come the fuck on. The Beatles were literally the zeitgeist-makers of their time. Everything they did would be adopted into the culture afterward. Meanwhile The Beach Boys were still wearing those striped shirts and singing about stuff that went out of fashion years earlier.

The Beach Boys are my favorite band and I vastly prefer them to The Beatles, but I'm not going to ignore reality

The Beatles have 8 albums which are arguably 10/10s (AHDN, H!, RS, R, SPLHCB, MMT, WA, AR). High end 9s at the very least. The Beach Boys have a couple of 10/10 albums. The Beatles were overwhelmingly more consistently brilliant. To have recorded that many masterpieces in a 5 year span is nothing short of incredible.

They changed so much in that time, too. The Beach boys in fairness obviously progressed too, but not to the extent that The Beatles did. The Beatles played psych/acid rock, country blues jams, hard rock/proto metal, avant garde sound collages, acoustic/piano ballads, experimental rock, comedy rock, gospel, doom metal, Indian raga rock, proto drone, folk rock, skiffle, rockabilly, psych pop, etc. The Beach Boys come off as so one dimensional in comparison, for me. To have experimented so heavily and attempted so many genres, yet have received enormous acclaim almost every single time they did, eclipses anything The Beach Boys managed.

>The Beach Boys peaks are better than The Beatles peaks
Fuck that. Strawberry Fields Forever is the best Beatles song in my opinion and it is better than Good Vibrations (which is also fantastic). Here There And Everywhere, Norwegian Wood, Happiness Is A Warm Gun, A Day in the Life, Tomorrow Never Knows, Rain, She Said She Said, In My Life, Abbey Road medley, the list goes on. The Beatles have so many masterpieces in their catalogue. The Beach Boys had a few.

There's just no debate.

>You just admitted neither of them did, so this is Not relevant

Yeah, like I said, they were both intuitive writers for fellas who didn't know theory, but Brian was more intuitive. He has the intuition of an extremely dedicated student of theory whereas John had the intuition of someone who took a college level course on it and learned some basic progressions and how to utilize second inversions well, etc.

>The point is communication with the audience and how to succeed in that, not "complexity". You should ask yourself-- who was better at communicating in this example: John/Paul with ADITL or Brian/Van with Surf's Up?

Sounds like an opinion to me, bub.

>So this is how you act in person? Must be a lonely life!

Only when I have arguments which is not often.

>You didn't ask. You just went straight to the strawmen and ad hominems

I shouldn't need to ask for arguments when I'm having an argument... Do you just debate in vague terms all of the time?

>Then we should credit Chuck Britz and The Wrecking Crew as well.

I did credit the Wrecking Crew above though.

>This was recently called into question as more perpetuation of "Eccentric Genius Brian" mythos by a number of first-hand sources. Also note there are NO evidence of those lyrics existing in 1966/1967 by Van or acetates or demos.

Called into question, yes. Refuted, no. All we can say on this topic is conjecture.

>Yeah, like I said, they were both intuitive writers for fellas who didn't know theory, but Brian was more intuitive. He has the intuition of an extremely dedicated student of theory whereas John had the intuition of someone who took a college level course on it and learned some basic progressions and how to utilize second inversions well, etc.
That's fine though
>Sounds like an opinion to me, bub.
That makes both of us, you realize.
>Only when I have arguments which is not often.
I life with nothing to fight for is a life not worth living
>I shouldn't need to ask for arguments when I'm having an argument
Do you also shout at walls?
>I did credit the Wrecking Crew above though.
Just reminding you, since you seemed to have forgotten.
>All we can say on this topic is conjecture.
Hence you cannot say that Brian wrote/arranged the finale of the song.

The quickest way to settle this debate is to just remind yourself which band created this album.

>That's fine though

"Fine" is the perfect word for it. "Fascinating" is the F-word for Brian's compositional and harmonic intuition.

>Hence you cannot say that Brian wrote/arranged the finale of the song.

And you can't credit it to the band like you were trying to do. Those darn facts, obscured by history and conflicting claims.

I have a final to go to in 15 minutes, so I'm just gonna duck out for now. It's just semantics and arguing over songwriting credits now. I'll dip back in if the thread is still here in 2 hours.

Forgot to quote you. Anyhow, peace.

Also, on what planet are this and Pet Sounds not at least equal? Even a Beatles fan could admit that.

Fascinating =/= better
It's just fascinating.
>Those darn facts
What fact? Again, there are conflicting first-person accounts, all factual.
>I have a final to go to
What are you, some kid?

dude straight up fuck the beatles
bunch of talentless wankers
the definition of pop music
bunch of arrogant assholes

the beatles are the coca-cola of music

Coke in a glass bottle is fucking great

"Dropped acid once." Lol

>the beatles wrote some great, near-perfect pop songs
This.

Everything else you said doesn't matter

literally the one true good thing about México

>the definition of pop music
>Helter Skelter
>Revolution 9
>You Know My Name
>Tomorrow Never Knows

Just admit you have never listened to any of those songs. Of course they also made pop, but it wasn't any old pop. It was the likes of Strawberry Fields Forever. Similarly The Beach boys progressed from very simplistic pop to experimental art pop like Good Vibrations. I would say The Beatles had a mastery of both pop music and experimental avant stuff, simultaneously. They could do both. Which is what makes their records so fantastic.

Revolver accomplishes a lot more, I feel. Pet Sounds is a whimsical, nostalgic, charming, warm album. And it excels at what it does. But Revolver is so diverse and musically sprawling despite being relatively short. It's peerlessly economical. Imagine an album coming in at a little over half an hour containing the songs Tomorrow Never Knows, Here There And Everywhere, Love You To, Eleanor Rigby, And Your Bird Can Sing, and so on.

"There's a case to be made that the Beatles went on to do Sgt. Pepper's because there was nowhere else to go but too far. With Revolver, they had mapped out the pop universe so perfectly that all they could do next was tear it up and start again."

>But Revolver is so diverse and musically sprawling despite being relatively short
It's 14 songs though.

i drink coke to make a statement. what that statement is, i have no idea.

How about

"I am thirsty"

naw dude i'm done sucking the beatle's cocks
they're absolutely nothing special
as musicians, or as people

>Tomorrow Never Knows, Here There And Everywhere, Love You To, Eleanor Rigby, And Your Bird Can Sing
The point is, those five songs I just listed are so different yet all appear on the same album and somehow feel cohesive together because of flavour The Beatles add, which is difficult to define. Those five songs alone offer more than the whole of Pet Sounds. Pet Sounds is simply a mastery of one particular style, which many bands have accomplished. Revolver is the mastery of a number of different sounds and styles, some of which The Beatles even invented themselves, which very few bands can accomplish.

it doesn't even quench your thirst though

not even the best beatles album

also i've never really listened to the beatles because i'm fucking stubborn as fuck

>nothing special
You do realise that when Brian Wilson heard Sgt Peppers, he fell into depression and faded away for a number of years because he simply could not come up with a way to match it. The Beach Boys and The Beatles were in a competition while recording Pet Sounds and Revolver respectively, trying to better the other but also admiring each other hugely. Sgt Peppers then literally sent Brian Wilson into a breakdown, kek.

So much for "nothing special".

Of course it quenches my thirst.

lol

I wasn't the guy you were talking to. I love Revolver.

My point is that although the album is "short" by our standards, it's still 14 songs, which is not "short".

brian wilson says it was more "mutual inspiration," not competition.

At least you can admit it, most Scaruffi drones on this board don't. I recommend putting the stubbornness aside and actually exploring their music. Honestly, you'll be thankful you did. You might finally understand the fuss.

Open up your music streaming service of choice as they aren't on YouTube, and listen to a handful of their songs.

>The Beatles played psych/acid rock, country blues jams, hard rock/proto metal, avant garde sound collages, acoustic/piano ballads, experimental rock, comedy rock, gospel, doom metal, Indian raga rock, proto drone, folk rock, skiffle, rockabilly, psych pop, etc.

If you can't even name which individual songs these are referring to, you can't really make any blanket judgments on the band. Hey Jude and She Loves You does not represent their work. Did you know that they invented heavy metal in the eyes of most music scholars and critics?

someone itt is trying to say john lennon's ear is in the same universe as Brian Wilson

maybe Paul, but John Lennon's tunes aren't even close.

Paul comes close.

That being said, I believe P-Mac and J-Len are better songwriters because their ability to focus

They (mainly Paul) were able to pluck sounds/harmonies from the universe and wrap them into concise, focused little dots. Like a kid with a magnifying glass frying an earthworm on a sidewalk.

Brian Wilson was like his own sun but the focus, the ability to wrap it up wasn't there after he went crazy

Brian Wilson had it when he wrote shit like Fun, Fun, Fun and I Get Around

nobody in pop music had more raw musical talent or a more gifted ear than Brian Wilson, unfortunately he went crazy but thank god for him

RIP

musicformaniacs.blogspot.ca/2014/09/100-copies-of-beatles-white-album.html
i know their songs, but mostly i've only listened to this version of the white album because i feel like i'm too patrician to listen to the beatles, or something
but i like LSD, so
also heavy metal isn't heavy enough

kys pls

no