Profile
Search
Register
Log in
The next Beatles?
View previous topic | View next topic >

Post new topic Reply to topic
Strange Famous Forum > Hall of Fame

Author Message
CaptainFantasy



Joined: 12 Apr 2007
Posts: 453
 Reply with quote  

What always amazed me about the Beatles is that they released 1 or 2 albums a year and these albums are still regarded as the some of the best albums of all time. That was the norm back then as the Rolling Stones, Beach Boys, etc. did the same thing. Why is it today that bands/artists release one album every 3-5 years or more and they pretty much all seem like they will be forgotten in 10-15 years. I'm not a musician but it seems like a damn long time to write and record 10-15 songs. Then you've got a few exceptions, Atmosphere is the first that comes to mind, that are putting out tons of solid material and it seems to be the best, most consistently great material being released. I guess what I'm throwing out there to musicians/artists is why has output slowed so much over the years and how do you think this corresponds with the quality of music being released?
Post Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:53 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
Captiv8



Joined: 25 Aug 2006
Posts: 8547
Location: Third Coast
 Reply with quote  

I think some artists/musicians have to compulsively release music or they will explode. Some are dedicated to the craft of consistently putting out music because it is their driving passion, motivation, and raison d'etre. Some are under certain commercial or contractual obligations to put out X amount of albums in X amount of years.

There is also (needless to say) a vast difference between commercial and independent artistry in terms of output, contracts, advertising, motivations, profit margins, effort, content, and quality. And there is also a disparity between artists that put everything they have into their music but can't support themselves off it and mainstream artists that seem to coast on their "talent" and label's coattails. Finally, there is also the question of who pays for the record's production. If an artist is self-financing chances are it could be a while. If their label is dropping the coin then you might get a record every 1-1.5 years.

But I'm digressing into a tangential discussion of mainstream versus independent and I don't want to do that.
Post Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:43 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
futuristxen



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 19374
Location: Tighten Your Bible Belt
 Reply with quote  

CaptainFantasy wrote:
What always amazed me about the Beatles is that they released 1 or 2 albums a year and these albums are still regarded as the some of the best albums of all time. That was the norm back then as the Rolling Stones, Beach Boys, etc. did the same thing. Why is it today that bands/artists release one album every 3-5 years or more and they pretty much all seem like they will be forgotten in 10-15 years. I'm not a musician but it seems like a damn long time to write and record 10-15 songs. Then you've got a few exceptions, Atmosphere is the first that comes to mind, that are putting out tons of solid material and it seems to be the best, most consistently great material being released. I guess what I'm throwing out there to musicians/artists is why has output slowed so much over the years and how do you think this corresponds with the quality of music being released?


You're asking in 2011 why musical output has slowed down when guys like Lil Wayne and Lil B are putting out a new song almost every day, and usually for free? When Strange Famous Records has a new downloadable song like every week?

I would say since Lil Wayne started bombing audiences with mixtape after mixtape, and leak after leak--that in today's music scene most artists that can do music quickly, are putting it out unfiltered at a much faster clip than ever before.

I mean find me someone in the Beatles era who was doing what Lil B has been doing?

Some mornings I wake up, and I'm like "fuck the beatles"...y'know? I hate that goddamn band sometimes.
Post Sun Oct 16, 2011 3:07 am
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
CaptainFantasy



Joined: 12 Apr 2007
Posts: 453
 Reply with quote  

Like I said there are exceptions. None of my comments or observations were intended to be all inclusive. I can't comment because I haven't heard any of these Lil Wayne or Lil B daily released songs but I do have to question the quality of these releases. Are they solid songs? I haven't heard these mixtapes either but will they be forgotten in a few years? I don't want to start a Beatles vs. Lil B argument because that's not what I'm getting at. I really am generally curious about the quality of music by artists that release a song daily. There has to be a point of diminishing returns somewhere for every artist.
Post Sun Oct 16, 2011 6:23 am
 View user's profile Send private message
FranktheP



Joined: 21 Jul 2004
Posts: 1367
Location: East Coast, Fuck You!
 Reply with quote  

futuristxen wrote:
Some mornings I wake up, and I'm like "fuck the beatles"...y'know? I hate that goddamn band sometimes.


Winner, winner, chicken dinner...the trolling is now complete. You won!!!!
Post Sun Oct 16, 2011 7:50 am
 View user's profile Send private message
Oh Daesu



Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 1848
Location: Vancouver
 Reply with quote  

FranktheP wrote:
futuristxen wrote:
Some mornings I wake up, and I'm like "fuck the beatles"...y'know? I hate that goddamn band sometimes.


Winner, winner, chicken dinner...the trolling is now complete. You won!!!!


Expressing a contrary opinion is trolling now? Wow, someone is Mr sensitive.
Post Sun Oct 16, 2011 6:04 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Inedible Condiment



Joined: 30 Sep 2008
Posts: 1045
Location: Halifax, NS
 Reply with quote  

It's disingenuous to say that futur is just "expressing a contrary opinion" in this thread.
Post Sun Oct 16, 2011 6:58 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
Oh Daesu



Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 1848
Location: Vancouver
 Reply with quote  

It also seems disingenuous to call it trolling it seems to me. To be fair I'm in agreement with her with most of what's been said here (minus some of the details).
Post Sun Oct 16, 2011 9:22 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Captiv8



Joined: 25 Aug 2006
Posts: 8547
Location: Third Coast
 Reply with quote  

The Beatles are eminently listenable, but that doesn't mean I always want to listen to them. But if I go into a coffee shop, say, and the baristas are making my mocha to the tune of "Here Comes the Sun" then I sing along in my head. I went through this phase in middle and early high school were I collected all the Beatles' records. I learned all the words and the meant something to me for a spell. But then I drifted away. Still, the Beatles have made music for just about every occasion and mood, and there's a reason their widely known and respected as iconic masters of their craft.

The closest approximation to the Beatles today that I can think of is Radiohead. Every record is a little different than the last, especially looking at Pablo Honey to the last one they just put out. They also have the staying power in the industry that most bands can't muster. I don't always like everything they do, but I respect it. Time will tell whether Thom Yorke's solo efforts will fracture the band, but I don't think that will be the case.

I'm also going to go out on a limb and say Pearl Jam. They have a massive fanbase that they've maintained over, what, 20+ years? That's impressive. They've also consistently put out quality albums, even though I don't necessarily like most of their tunes. And they're still fucking going. Again, that's something I can respect.
Post Sun Oct 16, 2011 11:14 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
futuristxen



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 19374
Location: Tighten Your Bible Belt
 Reply with quote  

Pearl Jam is kind of a blip in the radar when you compare them to bands like Sonic Youth and Dinosaur Jr. which put out albums before them that were great, and are still putting out pretty great albums, while Pearl Jam is in some kind of semi-retirement circuit. Plus I don't feel that Pearl Jam ever made an album that was completely great. They have several songs that I enjoy, but they don't have one album I can say that has more than five songs I really like on it. Compare that to Nirvana whose albums I enjoyed and still can enjoy from pretty much beginning to end. Unplugged, In Utero, and Nevermind are committed to my subconscious.

Getting back to the beatles, I'd rather get another Bob Dylan than another Beatles to be honest. Bob Dylan outlasted the band by what...40 years? I can't remember if he started before the Beatles as well. And he is STILL making dope albums. I can still listen to a Dylan song and be like "goddamn man". And his career has so many different movements in it, that you can kind of get locked into any particular era of Dylan and find some real gems. When you are talking about spanning different genres, the Beatles never got close to what Dylan has accomplished over his career.

I wouldn't mind another one of those.
Post Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:40 am
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
Jesse Custer



Joined: 01 Dec 2006
Posts: 1258
Location: London
 Reply with quote  

For the most part I agree with that assessment of Pearl Jam, but Ten is a bonafide classic.

I don't much care for Bob Dylan.
Post Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:47 am
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
corporateslave



Joined: 10 May 2005
Posts: 1110
Location: Lawrence, KS
 Reply with quote  

Inedible Condiment wrote:
It's disingenuous to say that futur is just "expressing a contrary opinion" in this thread.


Not liking the Beatles is a very minority opinion which I also share, and when you don't like the Beatles you have to deal with a bunch of smug fucks who won't stop pressing the issue when they find out you're not into them. Personally, I don't hate the Beatles, but I don't think they're anything special and I would never choose to listen to them on my own. But every time I've said this to someone who likes the Beatles they spend the next half hour how they are one of the greatest bands ever and only a tasteless boob would not like them. After dealing with that several times, it's hard not to develop a tone of disgust when talking about not liking the Beatles, because each time you do you're not only talking to the person in front of you, but also the dozens of clowns that have wasted your time arguing about it in the past.

It's the same for me with Bob Dylan. I can't stand him, but in the 'artsy' circles I run in that is a very minority opinion. And I think my dislike of Bob Dylan indirectly resulted in ending a relationship I had years ago. People get crazy defending their crappy taste in music.
Post Mon Oct 17, 2011 6:59 am
 View user's profile Send private message
FranktheP



Joined: 21 Jul 2004
Posts: 1367
Location: East Coast, Fuck You!
 Reply with quote  

I am not a huge Beatles fan myself but to not aknowledge what they did for music is to me trolling for arguements. It is the same for me with Bob Dylan. I don't particulary care for his music but I respect what he has accomplished, the road he laid out for others. To totally just dismiss a band's history is silly and to me it is trolling for a fight. And to think Pearl Jam is just on cruise controll is crazy too but that is a fight for another day.
Post Mon Oct 17, 2011 9:31 am
 View user's profile Send private message
Captiv8



Joined: 25 Aug 2006
Posts: 8547
Location: Third Coast
 Reply with quote  

futuristxen wrote:
Pearl Jam is kind of a blip in the radar when you compare them to bands like Sonic Youth and Dinosaur Jr. which put out albums before them that were great, and are still putting out pretty great albums, while Pearl Jam is in some kind of semi-retirement circuit. Plus I don't feel that Pearl Jam ever made an album that was completely great. They have several songs that I enjoy, but they don't have one album I can say that has more than five songs I really like on it. Compare that to Nirvana whose albums I enjoyed and still can enjoy from pretty much beginning to end. Unplugged, In Utero, and Nevermind are committed to my subconscious.


I get what you're saying here, but this discussion has to take place within the context of the popular realm. People on this message board and elsewhere had heard of Sonic Youth and Dinosaur Jr., but that number goes down when you approach the average person with the question. Further down still if you ask them to name an album or song. Pearl Jam, on the other hand, has more popular momentum and awareness from the public. It doesn't matter if they're on a retirement circuit. Will they remain popular for a timespan that extends beyond their actual career?

And you're also addressing the matter based on personal taste, which was not the initial question. This should be an objective thing because we're talking about who will be the next Beatles (or if that's even possible) to the public at large, not to us personally. Even if you hate the Beatles it's hard to deny that they were incredibly popular and have maintained an intense following for over 40 years. Love 'em or hate 'em, the Beatles are hard to fuck with.

I'm also a little surprised (even at my self) that no one has mentioned The Grateful Dead. Those guys went from the 60s to the 90s (and they only quit then because Garcia died) and put out just over 20 official albums. That's pretty impressive. I still wear a "Steal Your Face" t-shirt and have the odd Deadhead comment on it as I'm walking the dog or going to a movie. I think it's fair to say that the Deadhead fanbase is waning as most of their fans are now a bit old and blunted, but they're hanging on. In another ten years I think the judgment can be made one way or the other.
Post Mon Oct 17, 2011 9:45 am
 View user's profile Send private message
Jesse Custer



Joined: 01 Dec 2006
Posts: 1258
Location: London
 Reply with quote  

FranktheP wrote:
I am not a huge Beatles fan myself but to not aknowledge what they did for music is to me trolling for arguements. It is the same for me with Bob Dylan. I don't particulary care for his music but I respect what he has accomplished, the road he laid out for others. To totally just dismiss a band's history is silly and to me it is trolling for a fight. And to think Pearl Jam is just on cruise controll is crazy too but that is a fight for another day.


That's not what she was saying though. the 'some days I just think fuck em' statement resonated with me because I get sick of having the Beatles as a yardstick forced on me even though I don't much care for them (despite being able to respect what they did).
Post Mon Oct 17, 2011 10:54 am
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
All times are GMT - 6 Hours.
The time now is Fri Nov 28, 2014 2:52 am
  Display posts from previous:      


Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
Template created by The Fathom
Based on template of Nick Mahon