I dont get it

...

What's there to get? There's no deeper meaning or concept to this album.

It's "The Beatles," Sgt. Pepper was the thesis and The Beatles is the antithesis. Sgt. Pepper was named after a fake band, The Beatles was named after the real band. Sgt. Pepper had a lavish and elaborate cover, The Beatles had a plain and simple cover. Sgt. Pepper had a very tight concept that wraps itself up nicely. The Beatles is sprawling and endless, including nearly every song they had been working on for the past year with no consistent genre or style. It's a special type of album where you can hear the tender melody of Mother Nature's Son, the hard shrieking rock of Helter Skelter, the dark and gritty Happiness Is A Warm Gun, the gentle and personal Julia, the goofy lark that is Piggies, the spiritual ballad that is Long Long Long, the country-and-western Don't Pass Me By, or the simple lullaby that is Goodnight. The album contains a wide array of genres, including early 60s Chuck Berry rock and roll, hard rock, blues, British blues, folk, country, ska, nursery rhymes, musique concrete, pop, surreal pop, and more. Some songs are satirical, some songs don't even make sense, some songs they all worked together on, some songs are just one of them alone in a room. It's not them in a yellow submarine or on a magic tour bus, or in a fictional brass band, it's The Beatles! Take it or leave it.

Listen to Back to Basom, then you'll get it.

nice i wonder if any of them were actually thinking about these things

i enjoyed this post

The Beatles is 6.5/10 and Sgt. Pepper's is around a 3/10 lol.

Pete Best plz go

It's a meme you dip

It means the whites are taking over

time to helter skelt outta here

> i don't get it
you're overthinking this....

I remember one of them said in an interview that they wanted to get away from their extreme fame and their image of being "the fab four" so they decided on the blank cover. I don't think that there was a purpose behind all of the different styles and genres that you hear on it though. I think it sounds so disjointed and varied because a lot of the songs were done solo and thus they all went in different musical directions (a lot of that had to do with them not getting along well after Brian Epstein's death)

why do people over analyze the Beatles like this? they weren't this smart...just enjoy the music.

Huh, that's a cool way of looking at it.

You are talking about the band "The Beatles" or the.... other band? You know.... O_O

There's nothing particularly deep in that analysis.

how was he over analyzing?

lol get back to the library you NERD

they outright said they were doing this...???

All you need to know is that it's shit.

The fact that so many books still name Scaruffi as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" music critic ever only tells you how far music still is from becoming a serious art. Film critics have long recognized that the greatest film critics of all times are Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all times. Food critics rank the highly controversial reviewbrah over normal critics who were highly popular in restarants around Europe. Music fans are still blinded by commercial success. Scaruffi is most quoted (not true, by the way), therefore he must have been the greatest. Film fans grow up listening to a lot of film critics of the past, food fans grow up listening to a lot of food critics of the past. Music fans are often totally ignorant of the music critics of the past, they barely know the best sellers. No wonder they will think that Scaruffi did anything worthy of being saved.

>Sgt. Pepper was the thesis and The Beatles is the antithesis
I like this theory

I agree that people tend to overanalyze it but what that user said is literally the concept of those 2 albums. The Beatles themselves said that they had that in mind while doing them.