Sebastian
John`s early songs were mixed very Beatle-esque. Before `Another One Bites The Dust`
Thread
Posts in chronological order
emy
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Whisperer wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Sorry, must say one more thing.
I understand perfectly what The Beatles did to pop music and I'm aware of the fact that the Queen members were fond of them. My point is just that their songs weren't more special than the pop/dance songs of today (that rock fans seem to hate). The only difference was that they made songs like that before anyone else had done it.
Something I have never really understood is this:
Queen liked noice like Jimi Hendrix and Led Zeppelin (they have a few good songs too), but their own songs were so good and different from that crap. Foo Fighers like Queen, but all they do is make a lot of noice wihout any melody. [/QUOTE]
can I just say that your comment about the beatles doing something that nobody had done before is a complete load of dog doo. They took influences from all over the place and made it there own just like every other band on the planet has ever done. i'll give you some examples:
1) the verse of 'can't buy me love' is a 12 bar blues
2)'Get Back' is atlantic soul
3) Lady Maddona is piano blues
4) Taxman is Tamla Motown/Music Hall
5) Act naturally is country and western
6)c eight days a week is of black vocal group tradition
the first beatles album is obviously were there roots are going to spotted most easily and you can tell that they listened to R'n'B, motown, rock'n'roll and standard pop songs.
whilst saying that can i also add, What the hell? the beatles, first of all are a lot better than a lot of you seem to be giving them credit for. yeah, i admit, in the beginning their songs were all just simple pop love songs. however, as the sixties went on their music became more and more complex and stunning. and your comment on the fact that they were only making pop songs that were nothing special. what's wrong with a pop song? a good pop song is great to listen to. pop has become a dirty word.
and the foo fighters? listen to times like these, and if you don't hear the great melody lines in that then you must be deaf. give them a little credit too please. at least we know they have great taste in nusic.
I understand perfectly what The Beatles did to pop music and I'm aware of the fact that the Queen members were fond of them. My point is just that their songs weren't more special than the pop/dance songs of today (that rock fans seem to hate). The only difference was that they made songs like that before anyone else had done it.
Something I have never really understood is this:
Queen liked noice like Jimi Hendrix and Led Zeppelin (they have a few good songs too), but their own songs were so good and different from that crap. Foo Fighers like Queen, but all they do is make a lot of noice wihout any melody. [/QUOTE]
can I just say that your comment about the beatles doing something that nobody had done before is a complete load of dog doo. They took influences from all over the place and made it there own just like every other band on the planet has ever done. i'll give you some examples:
1) the verse of 'can't buy me love' is a 12 bar blues
2)'Get Back' is atlantic soul
3) Lady Maddona is piano blues
4) Taxman is Tamla Motown/Music Hall
5) Act naturally is country and western
6)c eight days a week is of black vocal group tradition
the first beatles album is obviously were there roots are going to spotted most easily and you can tell that they listened to R'n'B, motown, rock'n'roll and standard pop songs.
whilst saying that can i also add, What the hell? the beatles, first of all are a lot better than a lot of you seem to be giving them credit for. yeah, i admit, in the beginning their songs were all just simple pop love songs. however, as the sixties went on their music became more and more complex and stunning. and your comment on the fact that they were only making pop songs that were nothing special. what's wrong with a pop song? a good pop song is great to listen to. pop has become a dirty word.
and the foo fighters? listen to times like these, and if you don't hear the great melody lines in that then you must be deaf. give them a little credit too please. at least we know they have great taste in nusic.
YourValentine
"I really prefer Dieter Bohlen's catchy, simple and in some songs touching melodies to all that shit that McCartney, Lennon & Co. have written (yes, I have listened to a lot of their songs just to find out what is so good about them)."
To each their own but someone who prefers Dieter Bohlen to The Beatles cannot be taken seriously. You don't have to like a band's music to recognise the musical value. Leonard Bernstein called ´Lennon/McCartney geniusses and I would like to see more of his openminded view on "other music" in this world.
To call Led Zeppelin and and Jimi Hendrix "noice" just shows that you would not recognise good music when it hits you in the face. Again - you don't need to like it but you can still realise quality even if you yourself prefer Milli Vanilli.
To each their own but someone who prefers Dieter Bohlen to The Beatles cannot be taken seriously. You don't have to like a band's music to recognise the musical value. Leonard Bernstein called ´Lennon/McCartney geniusses and I would like to see more of his openminded view on "other music" in this world.
To call Led Zeppelin and and Jimi Hendrix "noice" just shows that you would not recognise good music when it hits you in the face. Again - you don't need to like it but you can still realise quality even if you yourself prefer Milli Vanilli.
Whisperer
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]YourValentine wrote: [/QUOTENAME]"I really prefer Dieter Bohlen's catchy, simple and in some songs touching melodies to all that shit that McCartney, Lennon & Co. have written (yes, I have listened to a lot of their songs just to find out what is so good about them)."
To each their own but someone who prefers Dieter Bohlen to The Beatles cannot be taken seriously. You don't have to like a band's music to recognise the musical value. Leonard Bernstein called ´Lennon/McCartney geniusses and I would like to see more of his openminded view on "other music" in this world.
To call Led Zeppelin and and Jimi Hendrix "noice" just shows that you would not recognise good music when it hits you in the face. Again - you don't need to like it but you can still realise quality even if you yourself prefer Milli Vanilli. [/QUOTE]
I don't think that Bohlen is a musical genious and neither does he. I just said that I really enjoy 90% of his songs while I only enjoy under 10% of the Beatles songs. Why can't I be taken seriously? Do I have to like some band only because other people say it's great? Or only because it's consider technically skillful?
Well, when I listen to Hendrix or Zeppelin, I mostly hear noice - guys raping their guitars. Sorry!
To each their own but someone who prefers Dieter Bohlen to The Beatles cannot be taken seriously. You don't have to like a band's music to recognise the musical value. Leonard Bernstein called ´Lennon/McCartney geniusses and I would like to see more of his openminded view on "other music" in this world.
To call Led Zeppelin and and Jimi Hendrix "noice" just shows that you would not recognise good music when it hits you in the face. Again - you don't need to like it but you can still realise quality even if you yourself prefer Milli Vanilli. [/QUOTE]
I don't think that Bohlen is a musical genious and neither does he. I just said that I really enjoy 90% of his songs while I only enjoy under 10% of the Beatles songs. Why can't I be taken seriously? Do I have to like some band only because other people say it's great? Or only because it's consider technically skillful?
Well, when I listen to Hendrix or Zeppelin, I mostly hear noice - guys raping their guitars. Sorry!
The Real Wizard
Wow, I can't believe some of the stuff I'm reading in this topic. All I have to say is this: like 'em or not, The Beatles changed the world more than any other band or artist ever did, and ever will.
If you're comparing overall musical quality to today's music, it's impossible to do so. Consider the technology of the 1960s, and then tell me the Beatles weren't years ahead of their time. Listen to other stuff from 66-67, then listen to Revolver and Sgt. Pepper. Musically, and production-wise, nobody came near them.
If you're comparing overall musical quality to today's music, it's impossible to do so. Consider the technology of the 1960s, and then tell me the Beatles weren't years ahead of their time. Listen to other stuff from 66-67, then listen to Revolver and Sgt. Pepper. Musically, and production-wise, nobody came near them.
Hank H.
It's been a long time since I read so much crap compiled in only one thread.
"Just one last thing: All you people who critisize dance music, listen to Mr. Bad Guy. There's your hero singing Modern Talking-styled songs."
OMG OMG. I don't want to defend Mr. Bad Guy, but the thought alone that anyone hears Bohlen through that album makes me cringe.
Besides, Whisperer, Bohlen sadly DOES think he is a genius.
Apart from that, I agree with what YV said.
"Just one last thing: All you people who critisize dance music, listen to Mr. Bad Guy. There's your hero singing Modern Talking-styled songs."
OMG OMG. I don't want to defend Mr. Bad Guy, but the thought alone that anyone hears Bohlen through that album makes me cringe.
Besides, Whisperer, Bohlen sadly DOES think he is a genius.
Apart from that, I agree with what YV said.
Maz
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Whisperer wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
The only difference was that they made songs like that before anyone else had done it.
[/QUOTE]
Apparently, innovation is highly overrated.
The only difference was that they made songs like that before anyone else had done it.
[/QUOTE]
Apparently, innovation is highly overrated.
MexQueenFM
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Whisperer wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Flashman wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Let me be the first to comment that the Beatles' little ditties couldn't possibly compare with Queen's stunning masterpieces.
[/QUOTE]
I agree 100%. The Beatles' songs are no better than the Britney/Aguilera/boyband songs of today. [/QUOTE]
My thoughts, the Beatles couldn't compare to Queen
[/QUOTE]
I agree 100%. The Beatles' songs are no better than the Britney/Aguilera/boyband songs of today. [/QUOTE]
My thoughts, the Beatles couldn't compare to Queen
Whisperer
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Hank H. wrote: [/QUOTENAME]It's been a long time since I read so much crap compiled in only one thread.
"Just one last thing: All you people who critisize dance music, listen to Mr. Bad Guy. There's your hero singing Modern Talking-styled songs."
OMG OMG. I don't want to defend Mr. Bad Guy, but the thought alone that anyone hears Bohlen through that album makes me cringe.
Besides, Whisperer, Bohlen sadly DOES think he is a genius.
Apart from that, I agree with what YV said.[/QUOTE]
In an interview from 1990 Bohlen said that he ain't no Andrew Lloyd Webber and he isn't trying to be. Maybe his thought about himself have changed. The point is still the same - Mr. Bad Guy is mostly a pop/dance album just like most of Bohlen's stuff. Mr. Bad Guy is not a masterpiece in a musical sence and also the lyrics are mostly silly, but it's still highly enjoyable. That's what matters, not how complicated the music is.
All you who critisize Bohlen, have you heard anything else by him than MT? I have listened to every single song that has been officially released by him. His catalogue certainly includes masterpieces. The variaty of his music is also huge - pop, dance, techo, schlager, rock, samba and certailnly a few other styles I have forgotten to mention.
Please don't forget that we are talking about a guy who has in Germany had more hits than anyone else and who has sold out stadiums in Germany and the Slavic countries. I guess that people in Easter-Europe have different taste in music than people in the Western World.
Here are some of the best know artists with whom Dieter has worked: Bonnie Tyler, Dionne Warwick, Engelbert Humperdinck & Al Martino.
"Just one last thing: All you people who critisize dance music, listen to Mr. Bad Guy. There's your hero singing Modern Talking-styled songs."
OMG OMG. I don't want to defend Mr. Bad Guy, but the thought alone that anyone hears Bohlen through that album makes me cringe.
Besides, Whisperer, Bohlen sadly DOES think he is a genius.
Apart from that, I agree with what YV said.[/QUOTE]
In an interview from 1990 Bohlen said that he ain't no Andrew Lloyd Webber and he isn't trying to be. Maybe his thought about himself have changed. The point is still the same - Mr. Bad Guy is mostly a pop/dance album just like most of Bohlen's stuff. Mr. Bad Guy is not a masterpiece in a musical sence and also the lyrics are mostly silly, but it's still highly enjoyable. That's what matters, not how complicated the music is.
All you who critisize Bohlen, have you heard anything else by him than MT? I have listened to every single song that has been officially released by him. His catalogue certainly includes masterpieces. The variaty of his music is also huge - pop, dance, techo, schlager, rock, samba and certailnly a few other styles I have forgotten to mention.
Please don't forget that we are talking about a guy who has in Germany had more hits than anyone else and who has sold out stadiums in Germany and the Slavic countries. I guess that people in Easter-Europe have different taste in music than people in the Western World.
Here are some of the best know artists with whom Dieter has worked: Bonnie Tyler, Dionne Warwick, Engelbert Humperdinck & Al Martino.
andYYY
Interesting debate, I would not even begin to be so arrogant as to dictate what one person thinks is crap or good, Mike Bloomfield once said that "Music is the soundtrack of YOUR life" I say AMEN to that cos it is different for everyone
I happen to like the Beatles, the songs like Queen's are disposal, who cares if they are innovative or derivative?, If it makes YOU smile, thats the Job done, if not, tune into something else.
I happen to like the Beatles, the songs like Queen's are disposal, who cares if they are innovative or derivative?, If it makes YOU smile, thats the Job done, if not, tune into something else.
Farlander
This thread had the potential to be extremely interesting, but seems to have degenerated into a Queen vs. Beatles debate, which is really too bad. I never even picked up on the Spread Your Wings and Rocky Raccoon connection. Couldn't we get back to talking about stuff like that and leave the Beatles hatred for another thread?
Whatinthewhatthe?
Remember David Bowie singing about putting out fire with gasoline?
Oy.....
Oy.....
Arnaldo "Ogre-" Silveira
- Someday one Day
- Life is Real (obviously)
- Life is Real (obviously)
Shane Jazz
Actually, the bouyant chorus of Calling All Girls is faintly Beatlesque.
FriedChicken
"Please don't forget that we are talking about a guy who has in Germany had more hits than anyone else and who has sold out stadiums in Germany"
That doesn't mean a damn think. David Hasselhoff had a HUGE no 1 in Germany.
Maybe that says something about the germans in general, i wouldn't know
That doesn't mean a damn think. David Hasselhoff had a HUGE no 1 in Germany.
Maybe that says something about the germans in general, i wouldn't know