¡Boom Boom!ghettosynth wrote:
What's Not To Like About The Beatles?
-
el-bo (formerly ebow) el-bo (formerly ebow) https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=208007
- KVRAF
- 18128 posts since 24 May, 2009 from A galaxy, far far away
-
el-bo (formerly ebow) el-bo (formerly ebow) https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=208007
- KVRAF
- 18128 posts since 24 May, 2009 from A galaxy, far far away
-
- KVRAF
- 4727 posts since 25 Mar, 2006 from The city by the bay
Even though there's less to discover about the classics there always seems to be some things out there to perhaps hear them in a new way.
That said, for some of us there will always be a special joy in being able to discover, or introduce folks to, music that for whatever reason seems to have been overlooked or forgotten.
That said, for some of us there will always be a special joy in being able to discover, or introduce folks to, music that for whatever reason seems to have been overlooked or forgotten.
-
- KVRAF
- 16802 posts since 13 Oct, 2009
Great playing, but, I think that if you're a fan that it's probably difficult to understand how even great covers like that trigger the same feeling of fatigue as listening to the original does. I had to turn it off about two thirds of the way through because I was already tired of it.rp314 wrote:Even though there's less to discover about the classics there always seems to be some things out there to perhaps hear them in a new way.
That said, for some of us there will always be a special joy in being able to discover, or introduce folks to, music that for whatever reason seems to have been overlooked or forgotten.
It's rare that I hear a Beatles song and not think about how many times I've heard it before. I think that part of the fatigue relates to how syrupy their work is overall. Really though, I don't know, it just doesn't move me for the most part. I still enjoy Abbey Road and that's probably the only album that I don't reach to "change the station" when it, or parts of it, are playing.
-
- KVRAF
- 16802 posts since 13 Oct, 2009
You know, funny thing is, that, while I agree, I largely feel the same way about Michael Jackson as I do about the Beatles. Too syrupy/cheesy and way overplayed. I prefer the original to that version because Michael's voice takes it down a notch. It's not even about whether it's good or not. I just don't like listening to him for the most part. Again, there are exceptions, but not many.Aloysius wrote:This is not too bad ...
I like it a lot.
-
- KVRist
- 414 posts since 19 Sep, 2016 from Wonderland
My sis don't like space oddity
I never make mistakes; I just blame others.
-
- Boss Lovin' DR
- 14312 posts since 15 Mar, 2002 from the grimness of yorkshire
They were all written by a machine, in its spare time between faking the moon landings.
-
- KVRian
- 1480 posts since 14 Jun, 2003
i've played horns with various beatles cover bands. heres my freecharts folder which has arrangements for some of thier tunes, almost all of the horn section tunes are in there with exceptions like northern song which really doesn't need a chart so much:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BwZgI ... FY3YTlSWVU
heres me playing windsynth/laptop doing all the horn parts except one trumpet which is covered by a real trumpeter:
so my take on the beatles was summed up when during one rehearsal we were doing "walrus" and the guitar was playing a e g a c a but i was pretty sure the lick is a e f# a c a as was in my chart. guitarist who doesn't read or write, and thats fine, insisted he was right. someone had a copy of the beatles complete scores and that agreed with me. guitarists says yeah but that book has a lot of mistakes. i said why doesn't somebody fix it? no answer.
guitarist won, of course, and i have a recording of that lick played that way by the guitar and strings and whole band somewhere. its pretty funny.
after that i went on reddit to talk about it and the vast majority was in agreement and linked me to covers by styx and others where its played as i thought.
one guy tho said the answer was neither f# or g but in between, using an indian scale that they were researching with yoga's etc.
in the end, and he even agreed after listening to those links, its an f# played pretty sharp on the french horn the first time that settles into pitch from there on.
but the take away i had from that is with the beatles it wasn't always about the music and the notes but also the religion and myth and vibe and the marketing of that.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BwZgI ... FY3YTlSWVU
heres me playing windsynth/laptop doing all the horn parts except one trumpet which is covered by a real trumpeter:
so my take on the beatles was summed up when during one rehearsal we were doing "walrus" and the guitar was playing a e g a c a but i was pretty sure the lick is a e f# a c a as was in my chart. guitarist who doesn't read or write, and thats fine, insisted he was right. someone had a copy of the beatles complete scores and that agreed with me. guitarists says yeah but that book has a lot of mistakes. i said why doesn't somebody fix it? no answer.
guitarist won, of course, and i have a recording of that lick played that way by the guitar and strings and whole band somewhere. its pretty funny.
after that i went on reddit to talk about it and the vast majority was in agreement and linked me to covers by styx and others where its played as i thought.
one guy tho said the answer was neither f# or g but in between, using an indian scale that they were researching with yoga's etc.
in the end, and he even agreed after listening to those links, its an f# played pretty sharp on the french horn the first time that settles into pitch from there on.
but the take away i had from that is with the beatles it wasn't always about the music and the notes but also the religion and myth and vibe and the marketing of that.
