Jamiroquai irritated the **** out of me. I wanted to pull that ****ing hat down on his head and batter him senseless.
This name should be a thread ender ............. music buffs, (even those who don't get Elvis) I give you (drum roll smilie) .............. the smug, fat, talentless, obnoxious, dozy bastard from Stoke ........ Robbie, he's not gay, Williams ............ top that ****er Chazz!
Each to their own, Charlesworth. 1st - Elvis; Next - Beatles. Rule-breakers. Even Sinatra at his peak.
Or is someone who doesn't like derivative, second rate stuff. Hat would Oasis have done if there hadn't been the Beatles?
Yes, difficult to get th biggest, most successful band of all time who only recorded for 8 years but sold more than anyone else and who you can't go a day without hearing one of their songs. How many of today's lot will be plated constantly in 50 years time?
What would The Beatles have done if it wasn't for Chuck Berry? What would Chuck Berry have done if it wasn't for Robert Johnson? Etc, etc, etc...
Kinell, I bet Macca and the sub drummer are well sore now. No wonder the two talented ones got the hell out early.
Actually that doesn't follow on at all. Chuck Berry had no connection, musically to Johnson. Johnson was before electric guitars and modern recording techniques. Berry influenced everyone with his introductions but the Beatles were more influenced by Buddy Holly, as they wrote their own songs from the beginning. That is what is interesting, in a very short period of time you can see them go from covering others, writing basic pop songs and then branching out and changing pop music and perceptions of it. Bob Dylan said he changed direction when he first heard Paperback Writer. Other groups came ready formed nod you don't see similar developments. I say this as so one who wasn't an avid Beatles fan, I was already into early Motown, Stax soul TV at the time, but it doesn't stop me realising how the Beatles changed things. Look at what they recorded, as well as touring and making films, in such a short space of time. Compare the output of bands that have lasted 4, 5 and 6 times as long and done nothing near. The only one who changed things as much was Elvis. Listen to the charts back then, full of people like Andy Williams, Rosemary Clooney, Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin and basically people your parents would have listened to and then imagine the impact of Heartbreak Hotel coming over the airwaves. Elvis opened the door for the others, black artists didn't get a look in until Elvis covered them and people became aware of them. Similar with the Beatles, people heard covers of Smokey Robinson and the like because they had heard the Beatles version of his songs. I discovered Solomon Burke, who is still a favourite of mine, because I had seen the Stones and Pretty Things had covered him and sought out the originals. This happened a lot back in the sixties as people were made aware of blues and soul singers because of covers. A lot of previously impoverished black musicians finally got some financial reward because of it. It was a far more interesting time to live through than nowadays. And not just musically.
Although I am not a fan of his only a complete idiot would say Macca wasn't talented. Lennon wrote a large amount of trite stuff.
What don't you get, exactly? I have never bought a Beatles record although I was growing up then and saw them live. But I am not so stupid as to not acknowledge what a major act they were and their place in music history.
