Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Fred's Barcalounge' started by drmilktruck, Jul 28, 2021.
That was not enough for me: I also own the 5 DVD set
It’s a long and winding road with me and the Beatles. Most of their songs I like and some, well, just sort of.
I did buy a very long book about the Byrds awhile back, but it was definitely way more than I needed or wanted to know about the band so I donated it to my local library.
Pretty much the reason I avoid books about bands or artists. I have only ever finished on similar sort of book, it was called, 'The Young Winston Churchill, it was fascinating. I do have an Elvis book does that count, and no I do not like all of his music either but I did like all the movies and some of his music. I mean what's not to like about a guy who got to act with Juliet Prowse and Ann Margret! But that's an entirely different thread right there. I do have a book of Day of the New music and Skynard and some CCR, but that's mostly their music. I should dig into it.
I was 11 yrs old when the Beatles first appeared on The Ed Sullivan Show. My memories of the Beatles for the next few years after that is of being in the basement poolroom of a pair of brothers that were friends of mine who would buy every album on its first day. Playing pool, listening to records and looking at their Dad's Playboys, we had it pretty good!
I’ve found that detailed bios of some of these bands don’t make for pleasant reading. I love the music of Gram Parsons, but his life was a train wreck. Some of the other bands of that time seemed to live a non-stop party of alcohol, drugs and casual sex. It’s amazing that some of these people even survived, and there were far too many that didn’t survive. The “Forever 27” club is far too large.
Jim, you make some very good points, and I appreciate your insight. You are correct, my son gets many comments about his ability to play banjo for someone so young. The Banjo was the Rock and Roll instrument up to the 1940's, with some reemergence in the "folk scene" (Kingston Trio, etc). Banjo is still used in Country. The kids in Jazz Band, thought that it was an awesome instrument, leading to several purchases.
As with the Beatles, their legacy is not going to be dead, we introduced the Beatles to the H.S. choir, and the kids loved the music, because to them it was new and fresh. Many of them included Beatles songs in their play sets when they went on to create or join Bands. Many of the comments from some of the established/seasoned groups were surprised by the recognition from some of the kids who were not born until 30 years after the Beatles broke up.
Before the shop closed, we sold many unpopular tenor banjos to the youth who were migrating from the other popular 4-string instrument known as the ukulele.
It is a possibility that everything old becomes new, in my opinion, and I may be wrong, but good music is timeless.
I’ve always loved the sound of Tenor Banjo. My father had a very broad music collection and I used to love the Tenor Banjo I heard on those records. Especially, I loved how they used chords with careful voice leading and even as chord-melody. I am unable to sustain a good RH tremolo for any length of time, so I would not be able to make my mark in that lucrative world of Tenor Banjo. (I’ve practiced like mad, and come to to believe that there is a neurological limitation which caps the speed of my right hand. I am faced with similar limitations in single note picking, which means that 16th notes for measures on end just don’t happen for me, even after decades of careful scale practice.)
Recently, at the Surf guitar forum, we had a lengthy discussion of the future of Surf music. The original generation of Surf players are in their 70s or 80s at this point, and even the youngest listeners from that era would have to be in their 60s. So the question arises; how much longer will Surf music from the ‘60s be culturally relevant? It was obscure for decades, until Pulp Fiction reintroduced it to the social mainstream. For the last 27 years, Surf has had a degree of popularity that probably exceeded the wildest dreams of the ‘60s Surf artists, but this effect will not last forever.
The Surf community remains viable because of the power of Internet groups. Concerts and gatherings can be published to targeted interest groups. Forums serve as places to meet other musicians and form bands. Slowly, Surf is settling into a group of people with a shared special interest and no longer reliant on the mass market for its survival. The same could be said for Ragtime, Bluegrass and Polkas played by accordions and clarinets.
The Beatles were a study in mass market, so it remains to be seen just how this will fit into the future, when it joins the ranks of musical niches. To my way of thinking, the music of the Beatles will increasingly have to stand upon its merits and those elements of their catalog which depended upon the momentum of their publicity to be accepted will fall to the margins.
First off, Thank You!
I agree with you, and honestly, sometimes it surprises me how things spin back into being popular.
Without breaking the rules of client/patient confidentiality, my son has several patients who request the Banjo for their Music Therapy, since it was the Rock and Roll instrument of the day, it does make a connection. We saw one of the nurses in the store, and she commented how the staff enjoyed when a 90 something year old was singing with his/her 20 something year old Therapist "reminiscing about songs that she never knew existed".
Just like surf Music, good music will live on, it is up to people like us to expose those who are unaware of a bygone era. If the music was good, they will listen.
The daughter of a patient of mine was telling me that her mother could still sit down at the piano and sing old songs despite advanced dementia. She couldn't remember what happened 5 minutes ago but knew the songs.
I love the Beatles as much as the next guy and have played/gigged/recorded maybe 20 of their songs over the years. But I've noticed a lot of members here have a semi obsession with them.
A part of obsession is constant repetition of the same info.
So is getting guitars and Vox amps in an attempt to sound like a 60 yr old recording.
They broke up 50 yrs ago - time to get it over it and move on
While indisputably talented both as individuals and as a band, often overlooked is the genius recording staff that they had assigned to them. The production value on their studio work was stellar, especially considering they were working with an 8 track recorder at best.
I admit I did get a tiny bit tired of hearing I Want to Hold Your Hand a million times a day on the radio. As I've stated earlier, I much preferred the complexity of their later stuff. But IWTHYH was OK the first half-million times I heard it.
But otherwise Too Much Beatles??? Yeah, that one time I heard some instrumental version of Yesterday while I was in an actual elevator. I was trapped and I almost threw up.
Edit: and a big part of the reason why I can't watch or listen to Lawrence Welk today. I understand his Beatles Medley is very popular.
and.... Sir George Martin
Our individual relationship with music is complex. I have noticed that people reach a certain point in life where their musical tastes seem to gel and they will have a lifelong affinity for that music. My musical tastes gelled in the early ‘80s and most of what I listen to comes from the ‘60s, ‘70s and early ‘80s. In my fathers case, his musical tastes seem to have gelled in the ‘40s and he listened to Frankie Carle recordings for the rest of his life. There were newer things that he liked, such as Chet Atkins and the Ventures, but he loved his ‘40s music.
I have read that the memories of music are especially deeply rooted in our psyches. Playing music does wonders for me.
Today, I was fatigued and feeling a bit washed out. Left to my own devices, I probably would have vegetated all day, but there’s a gig next Saturday and we needed to rehearse. Even though I was tired, playing transcended my fatigue and I was able to play reasonably well. Even as I played, it was obvious to me that the music was coming from deep within. It’s more of a subconscious thing. I was so tired that I could barely hold a conversation, but I could count of a song, play it and sing the lyrics, almost without conscious effort.
A while back, I saw a video on YouTube of a US based icebreaker that made its way to the North Pole and found a Russian icebreaker there, filled with a group of young people, there on a tour. The group were all musicians and singers, think Up With People, so there was a bunch of preteens and “tweens” who were there to film a television program. One little girl, about 12 years old, just seemed to come to life whenever she had an audience. It was fun to watch, because she was a perfect little performer.
My point is that this talented child was a musician through and through. This wasn’t a trained monkey, she was playing and singing from the depths of her psyche. I’ve seen this with my music students, and some fairly young children seem to just burst with musicality. When you have a student like this, the hardest thing is to keep them from running ahead of themselves and allowing them to play beyond the level of their technical skills. The common thread is that such students experience a change in consciousness once they start playing. You can see them sort of step into a zone where they are concentrated on their music and less interested in verbal communications.
The human mind is a mystery. It seems like it’s more than the sum of its parts. Obviously, the brain has to be intact, and that’s the tragedy of Alzheimer’s disease. But there is so much more to our minds than any of us can fully comprehend. Music is all but universal, at least as an appreciated art, but even appreciating music requires a lot of the mind. Why does my cat like music? She obviously does, and any time I play, my cat will lay nearby and seems to take it in. Music is a mystery.
Now, that sounds like one of the most fun trinities imaginable - music, pool, playboys, what else would you want?
Buying albums on the release day ... I didn't do often. I remember I bought one Iron Maiden album right when it came out, must have been like late nineties, and it ... wasn't that good ... was pretty boring, actually ... I think it was 1998, but forgot how it was called.
The last Pretty Things album, I preordered, received - and wasn't disappointed in any way, but very happy with it.
But, as I get it, buying a physical representation of music isn't that common anymore. When I look at my CD shelf (I built that from particle board, 1,8 m and 1,2 m, four stories, having room for 1200 standard jewel cases), and how large that thing is, and impracticle to move ... and I even use another shelf, too, because not all of them fit in ... and then, a simple HDD, bearing no more than a bit over 1 TB, size of a pack of cigarettes, if desired (and paid) even smaller, can carry the same amount of data like all those discs, ...
... when the Beatles were big, got big, you had to decide if you weren't that well off - and, by then, the typical Beatles-fan wasn't a well-off guy in his mid-forties who deliberately chose a hobby that makes him look cool, after he figured that buying an Aston Martin won't bring back his youth or hair, ... but a young person, in school or not that far out of, usually having to budget other things to be able to buy the latest record ... had to decide between Beatles, Stones and someone else, delay the other ones for a month or two, ... this - the limited access and ressources - it seems, made people appreciate music more than today's abundance. Leading to identifying more with it, with the decision made, with the record bought, with the band on it. Being the first of a new generation, partially evolving from the predecessors, partially having the generational break because it shifted from the US to the UK (the place the coolest music of that time originated), or at least is seen and displayed so nowadays ... but that's besides, it made them appear more disruptive than they actually were (same goes for the Stones and the entre "British Invasion"), made the Beatles the one-of-a-kind that they are seen as.
Coincidence and great musicianship, right time and right place, all that went hand in hand in hand in hand in hand in regard to the Beatles and their influence.
... and that, it seems to me, makes the Beatles one of the most examined, most precisely analyzed, bands of all time. Often, I guess, the perceived Beatles exceed the actual Beatles in many ways. Maybe, the ones most suffering from Beatles-overdoses are the Beatles thenselves? No matter how good, great, innovative they were, or how bad, stupid and repetitive, the view on them, it seems, never is "just four guys making good music at the right time and place", although that may be perfectly enough worshippery towards them. The PR was pristine, too - when was the last time afterwards that you coud go to a hairdresser and order a haircut similar to an entire band ... and people actually did so? Happened again at all?
It's just as easy to OD on the Stones - just take a list of the vehicles they bought within the sixties or seventies alone, reads like a residential register of a dream-garage of anyone alive in that period ... I wouldn't be surprised if there were more words written about the Beatles' or the Stones' cars than about other wellknown, long-lasting bands altogether.
Anyway, I don't know any further on this ... the remote machine is done getting restarted (Creo got stuck a few times), so I'll just bite my desk over the lost data and continue now ... or ... something ...