Aren't the Beatles numbers lower just because there's at least 3 different mixes of every song and the most commonly streamed ones (the Remastered: 2009 ones, which are actually the stereo mixes from the 60s rather than the original mono mixes) sound like absolute ass?
I'm pretty sure only Revolver and Sgt Pepper (plus a handful of early singles which only exist in mono) are up on Spotify in mono right now. And even then they're buried on disc 3 or 4 of the remixes deluxe box set so they're still a bit obscure. It's baffling - their albums sound like shit in stereo up until the White Album-ish and yet for some reason those crap mixes are still the most commonly available ones
>lol beatles fans are such repressed homos it's insane
If you were born to a single mother between the years 1960-1969 it's very likely that Paul McCartney's your father
>because listening to the beatles (boyband) is such a heterosexual activity
They were never really a boyband though. They were a rock n' roll band and their manager told them to start wearing matching suits instead of matching leather jackets and that John should stop swearing and getting into fist fights with the audiences during live performances if someone in the crowd called him a gay.
Boybands happened way later and are usually manufactured by some svengali manager/producer, the Beatles weren't like that at all.
No? He was their producer and really important for their sound but that's nothing like what a boyband producer does. If you look at someone like Lou Pearlman (who created the Backstreet Boys and Nsync) it was his idea to create the band in the first place, he trained them to dance and sing together, he set them up with the different songwriters who actually wrote the material and so on. Oh, and in the case of Lou Pearlman he was a pathological liar who was stealing from them and had tied both bands into incredibly shit contracts which gave him all the creative control and money.
Beatles were an actual band before Brian Epstein (their manager) found them. Epstein got them to dress differently and act a bit different on stage but that's it. The Beatles right from the start wrote the majority of their own material, played their own instruments, in a style (rock n' roll) which they'd had before meeting Epstein and so on.
George Martin (their producer) got them to kick out their drummer, Pete Best (although they were reportedly sick of him already since he was a shit drummer) but they bought in Ringo. George Martin himself had bought in a session musician for their next session already since he hated Pete's drumming. The Beatles themselves loved Ringo and loved Ringo's drumming whenever he sat in with them already so it was their choice to bring in Ringo
And yeah, George Martin did contribute a lot to their sound, especially as they went on (also engineer Geoff Emmerick although he didn't come into the picture until Revolver) but that's also literally every producer ever. The actual songs themselves were written by John, Paul and George.
Oh, don't get me wrong The Monkees (at least initially because they did turn into an actual band as they went on) were a really early example of a boy band, since they were really a tv show that had been put together to try to artificially create the magic that the Beatles had in A Hard Day's Night and Help. Plus (again, initially) they didn't write any of their own songs. Only thing is that the term "boy band" literally wouldn't exist for another 20 years before they came along
I was going to impulsively say the White Album is their best album but then I read the rest of you post so I tip my hat to you sir. I also agree the Capitol version of MMT is incredible.
>All albums except for Beatles For Sale >All Beatles songs except for anything on Beatles for Sale >All the Beatles, especially George and Ringo >Come Together is the worst popular Beatles song
I like John's tracks on Beatles for Sale, especially the opening trio of No Reply, I'm A Loser and Baby's In Black. The covers are mostly awful though and the master tape for Mr. Moonlight should've been burnt
For me it's Rubber Soul in mono. Track for track it's the best thing the Beatles ever did. Magical Mystery Tour's great but some of the tracks on side 1 (which is the original EP) are kinda filler. Side 2 (which was all the singles released that year) is fricking amazing though
I was going to impulsively say the White Album is their best album but then I read the rest of you post so I tip my hat to you sir. I also agree the Capitol version of MMT is incredible.
Man I wish I knew of more albums that had the same weird experimental almost unsettling vibe that Magical Mystery Tour and especially the White Album have. Pic related comes kinda close but not really.
I hate that I'm just short of being schizo enough to fully understand what this is supposed to be conveying. Like the animal costumes in Magical Mystery tour look like the bear costume in The Shining? Okay?
Kubrick was known for hiding symbols in his movies. The bear costume that appears in the shining for reasons that aren't really clear is the spitting image of the top center costume on the cover of magical mystery tour, an album cover that is also associated with hidden meaning a la the Paul is dead theory. In a frame of another Kubrick movie the album magical mystery tour is seen on the center of a shelf in this music store, and if you were to look at it from a straight on perspective it would be in perfect alignment with the spiral void on the ceiling and the poster for 2001 a space odyssey, yet another Kubrick movie that itself has alignment as a central motif of its storytelling.
>The bear costume that appears in the shining for reasons that aren't really clear
It's been a while since I read it but isn't in The Shining novel? I seem to remember it's a dog costume instead though. I think Stephen King even goes into a bit of detail about who those 2 actually were (again, been a while though.)
I know Kubrick changed virtually the entire point and plot of The Shining but it's not really a "mystery" per se.
I hate that I'm just short of being schizo enough to fully understand what this is supposed to be conveying. Like the animal costumes in Magical Mystery tour look like the bear costume in The Shining? Okay?
Reminder that the Beatles at their height were literally more popular than Jesus. At their peak on Our World they got 400 million viewers which was basically every TV in the world. They literally could have brought world peace if they didn't break up.
Think of it this way. If Jesus, Elvis, and Michael Jackson rose from the dead and formed a supergroup with Taylor Swift, Beyonce, Snoop Dogg, and Eminem, and had a deal with Coca-Cola, it still wouldn't be as big as the Beatles were in the 1960s.
Nah I reckon Jesus would get a decent crowd still, even non-believers would want to at least see him for real. I mean, it's fricking Jesus. You're right about the rest of them though
I just don't get why a Bealtes album being in a Kubrick movie from 1971 has anything to do with a costume looking somewhat similar to what George is wearing on said cover in a different Kubrick movie from 1980. And that's not even mentioning that George is dressed as a rabbit on Magical Mystery Tour and the guy in The Shining is dressed up as a bear
gay ass boyband tbh
>here comes the sun on top
I like both.
How about that, gay?
Yeah, Queen is pretty gay
Aren't the Beatles numbers lower just because there's at least 3 different mixes of every song and the most commonly streamed ones (the Remastered: 2009 ones, which are actually the stereo mixes from the 60s rather than the original mono mixes) sound like absolute ass?
The first two-thirds of their catalogue are better in mono anyways. Not sure why they weren’t promoted more following the new mono mixes
I'm pretty sure only Revolver and Sgt Pepper (plus a handful of early singles which only exist in mono) are up on Spotify in mono right now. And even then they're buried on disc 3 or 4 of the remixes deluxe box set so they're still a bit obscure. It's baffling - their albums sound like shit in stereo up until the White Album-ish and yet for some reason those crap mixes are still the most commonly available ones
>zoomers like Queen more because it's a gay band
Truly a hopeless generation
because listening to the beatles (boyband) is such a heterosexual activity
lol beatles fans are such repressed homos it's insane
>lol beatles fans are such repressed homos it's insane
If you were born to a single mother between the years 1960-1969 it's very likely that Paul McCartney's your father
>because listening to the beatles (boyband) is such a heterosexual activity
They were never really a boyband though. They were a rock n' roll band and their manager told them to start wearing matching suits instead of matching leather jackets and that John should stop swearing and getting into fist fights with the audiences during live performances if someone in the crowd called him a gay.
Boybands happened way later and are usually manufactured by some svengali manager/producer, the Beatles weren't like that at all.
>manufactured by some svengali manager/producer
I like the Beatles but isn't that basically what George Martin was for them.
No? He was their producer and really important for their sound but that's nothing like what a boyband producer does. If you look at someone like Lou Pearlman (who created the Backstreet Boys and Nsync) it was his idea to create the band in the first place, he trained them to dance and sing together, he set them up with the different songwriters who actually wrote the material and so on. Oh, and in the case of Lou Pearlman he was a pathological liar who was stealing from them and had tied both bands into incredibly shit contracts which gave him all the creative control and money.
Beatles were an actual band before Brian Epstein (their manager) found them. Epstein got them to dress differently and act a bit different on stage but that's it. The Beatles right from the start wrote the majority of their own material, played their own instruments, in a style (rock n' roll) which they'd had before meeting Epstein and so on.
George Martin (their producer) got them to kick out their drummer, Pete Best (although they were reportedly sick of him already since he was a shit drummer) but they bought in Ringo. George Martin himself had bought in a session musician for their next session already since he hated Pete's drumming. The Beatles themselves loved Ringo and loved Ringo's drumming whenever he sat in with them already so it was their choice to bring in Ringo
And yeah, George Martin did contribute a lot to their sound, especially as they went on (also engineer Geoff Emmerick although he didn't come into the picture until Revolver) but that's also literally every producer ever. The actual songs themselves were written by John, Paul and George.
Man, AI got Ringo looking all fricked up
literally better than anything the Queen Aids troony band ever did
I feel validated now that the general consensus is that Here Comes the Sun is the best Beatles song
the monkeys were a "boy band". the beatles were an actual band.
The term "boy band" didn't even exist until New Kids On The Block in the 80s.
okay
Oh, don't get me wrong The Monkees (at least initially because they did turn into an actual band as they went on) were a really early example of a boy band, since they were really a tv show that had been put together to try to artificially create the magic that the Beatles had in A Hard Day's Night and Help. Plus (again, initially) they didn't write any of their own songs. Only thing is that the term "boy band" literally wouldn't exist for another 20 years before they came along
can you extend this to the top 20 of each band. i would be interested in the total of each of the top 20 sir
it’s their best album
>inb4 it’s an ep
even if that were true, then the white album would be their best album
I was going to impulsively say the White Album is their best album but then I read the rest of you post so I tip my hat to you sir. I also agree the Capitol version of MMT is incredible.
Okay anons:
>Favorite Beatles Album
>Favorite Beatles Song
>Favorite Beatle
>Least favorite Beatles song (hardmode: no Revolution 9)
I love these homies like you wouldn’t believe.
>All albums except for Beatles For Sale
>All Beatles songs except for anything on Beatles for Sale
>All the Beatles, especially George and Ringo
>Come Together is the worst popular Beatles song
I like John's tracks on Beatles for Sale, especially the opening trio of No Reply, I'm A Loser and Baby's In Black. The covers are mostly awful though and the master tape for Mr. Moonlight should've been burnt
>Favorite Beatles Album
abbey road
>Favorite Beatles Song
eleanor rigby
>Favorite Beatle
george
>Least favorite Beatles song
hey jude
Eleanor Rigby sucks and Hey Jude is fantastic
if you hoped I would be surprised by how bad your taste was: I'm not. it's what I expect.
For me it's Rubber Soul in mono. Track for track it's the best thing the Beatles ever did. Magical Mystery Tour's great but some of the tracks on side 1 (which is the original EP) are kinda filler. Side 2 (which was all the singles released that year) is fricking amazing though
Man I wish I knew of more albums that had the same weird experimental almost unsettling vibe that Magical Mystery Tour and especially the White Album have. Pic related comes kinda close but not really.
For me it's Revolver
Revolver is for fake ass Cinemaphile tryhards. Rubber Soul and Abbey Road are the patrician's Beatles albums
No that's the White Album
You guys are missing the point of the thread
OP's pic has no apparent meaning, and OP isn't explaining who made the image or any guess as to what the image could mean. we have nothing to go on
Kubrick was known for hiding symbols in his movies. The bear costume that appears in the shining for reasons that aren't really clear is the spitting image of the top center costume on the cover of magical mystery tour, an album cover that is also associated with hidden meaning a la the Paul is dead theory. In a frame of another Kubrick movie the album magical mystery tour is seen on the center of a shelf in this music store, and if you were to look at it from a straight on perspective it would be in perfect alignment with the spiral void on the ceiling and the poster for 2001 a space odyssey, yet another Kubrick movie that itself has alignment as a central motif of its storytelling.
okay. you could have just said that instead of pretending you didn't know that. there's nothing to add to it.
>The bear costume that appears in the shining for reasons that aren't really clear
It's been a while since I read it but isn't in The Shining novel? I seem to remember it's a dog costume instead though. I think Stephen King even goes into a bit of detail about who those 2 actually were (again, been a while though.)
I know Kubrick changed virtually the entire point and plot of The Shining but it's not really a "mystery" per se.
Thinly veiled Cinemaphile thread?
Nah Beatles movies count as kino (well, 2 of them do at least)
I hate that I'm just short of being schizo enough to fully understand what this is supposed to be conveying. Like the animal costumes in Magical Mystery tour look like the bear costume in The Shining? Okay?
Reminder that the Beatles at their height were literally more popular than Jesus. At their peak on Our World they got 400 million viewers which was basically every TV in the world. They literally could have brought world peace if they didn't break up.
Beatles lore on the break-up is quite interesting. If only they had done a reunion…
John the frickin phoney
>They literally could have brought world peace if they didn't break up.
lol I hope you're not serious
The announcement of their break-up literally caused a minor recession in Britain. That's how big they were
Source? Unless it was mentioned in a Beatles biography or some shit
Think of it this way. If Jesus, Elvis, and Michael Jackson rose from the dead and formed a supergroup with Taylor Swift, Beyonce, Snoop Dogg, and Eminem, and had a deal with Coca-Cola, it still wouldn't be as big as the Beatles were in the 1960s.
Nah I reckon Jesus would get a decent crowd still, even non-believers would want to at least see him for real. I mean, it's fricking Jesus. You're right about the rest of them though
You guys are ruining my schizo thread
I just don't get why a Bealtes album being in a Kubrick movie from 1971 has anything to do with a costume looking somewhat similar to what George is wearing on said cover in a different Kubrick movie from 1980. And that's not even mentioning that George is dressed as a rabbit on Magical Mystery Tour and the guy in The Shining is dressed up as a bear
Also if you watch the music video George's costume in motion looks quite different from the bear costume in The Shining:
Low quality OPs like yours cause this. You had to be more specific, or at least NOT USE THE SAME DUMB QUESTION
Didn't notice the John Fahey album before, based
Maybe Kubrick liked the Beatles?