The Beatles have invaded iTunes store

[Nyarlath]

Oh, I should say that when I talk about the Beatles, I mean 1965-1970, the ACTUAL Beatles. Everything before that was crap. It got them famous, but the music that wasn't just I-IV-V repeating into oblivion is the real meat of the Beatles.

[Kim]

Originally Posted by Soopahmahn

You're right, because everybody was doing what the Beatles did long before they did it. Copycats, the lot of 'em.

Did I say they were copycats?

[Helter Skelter]

Wirelessly posted (Stupid Motorola Backflip: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 1.5; en-us; MB300 Build/Blur_Version.0.13.37.MB300.ATT.en.US Flex/P014) AppleWebKit/528.5+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.2 Mobile Safari/525.20.1)

Originally Posted by Soopahmahn

You're right, because everybody was doing what the Beatles did long before they did it. Copycats, the lot of 'em.

Especially once you get past the first five years or so, those guys were progressive as hell.

The thing is, you're both right. At first, the labels were just whoring the Beatles out for massive profit. The band grew beyond that, though. Look at their stuff after India compared to what they had been doing before. The difference is huge. I think it's obvious I'm a fan, but as has been pointed out, the Beatles were incredibly influential. A lot of the music we like now wouldn't be the same, or might not even exist, without them.

[Drew]

Helter Skelter = about the best thing the Beatles ever recorded.

Originally Posted by Nyarlath

Oh, I should say that when I talk about the Beatles, I mean 1965-1970, the ACTUAL Beatles. Everything before that was crap. It got them famous, but the music that wasn't just I-IV-V repeating into oblivion is the real meat of the Beatles.

To be fair, even their candy-coated pop stuff wasn't really "I-IV-V repeating into oblivion" stuff - before they began writing they'd spent a lot of time covering the "pop" standards of their day, which back then really was rooted pretty deeply in jazz harmony. A lot of their chordal stuff is really pretty damned cool.

I thought the real reason they stayed off iTunes for so long was the long legal battle between the Beatles' "Apple Records" and Apple? The first case for copyright infringment got tossed because Apple wasn't a music company, but when they opened iTunes the Beatles immediately re-sued?

[Soopahmahn]

Originally Posted by Kim

Did I say they were copycats?

I was having fun with sarcasm. One is licensed to exaggerate when doing so.

Originally Posted by Helter Skelter

The thing is, you're both right. At first, the labels were just whoring the Beatles out for massive profit. The band grew beyond that, though. Look at their stuff after India compared to what they had been doing before. The difference is huge. I think it's obvious I'm a fan, but as has been pointed out, the Beatles were incredibly influential. A lot of the music we like now wouldn't be the same, or might not even exist, without them.

I guess, but even when they first came out, I was pretty sure that it was "a whole new sound" that captivated everybody. A lot of their fame had to do with image as well, though.

Originally Posted by Drew

I thought the real reason they stayed off iTunes for so long was the long legal battle between the Beatles' "Apple Records" and Apple? The first case for copyright infringment got tossed because Apple wasn't a music company, but when they opened iTunes the Beatles immediately re-sued?

AppleInsider | It's official: Apple and The Beatles kiss and make up

Looks like you're right.

[sami]

Originally Posted by Nyarlath

Oh, I should say that when I talk about the Beatles, I mean 1965-1970, the ACTUAL Beatles. Everything before that was crap. It got them famous, but the music that wasn't just I-IV-V repeating into oblivion is the real meat of the Beatles.

I believe Bob Dylan is what made them break the mold?

[Mike]

Originally Posted by Drew

To be fair, even their candy-coated pop stuff wasn't really "I-IV-V repeating into oblivion" stuff - before they began writing they'd spent a lot of time covering the "pop" standards of their day, which back then really was rooted pretty deeply in jazz harmony. A lot of their chordal stuff is really pretty damned cool.

This. Learn some of those simple, candy-coated pop songs, where a lot of the changes don't go where you expect. Then try and *write* something like that.

While I'm a bigger fan of the later stuff, even a song like "Help" isn't as simple as it sounds.

[Bloody_Inferno]

Originally Posted by Mike

This. Learn some of those simple, candy-coated pop songs, where a lot of the changes don't go where you expect. Then try and *write* something like that.

While I'm a bigger fan of the later stuff, even a song like "Help" isn't as simple as it sounds.

From the band who had diverse tunes from "I saw her standing there" to "Tomorrow never knows", they knew how to clerverly craft their musicianship into pop songs and make it sound so simple.

[Josh]

Originally Posted by Mike

This. Learn some of those simple, candy-coated pop songs, where a lot of the changes don't go where you expect. Then try and *write* something like that.

While I'm a bigger fan of the later stuff, even a song like "Help" isn't as simple as it sounds.

This. They're not just bashing out standard power, major, and minor chords. Some songs are serious finger-twisters.

[Kim]

Originally Posted by Soopahmahn

I was having fun with sarcasm. One is licensed to exaggerate when doing so.

Oh sorry, I can't find out where I turn off the sarcasm filter on the internet.
it keeps translating all sarcasm as SRS BSNS!