What's with the Beatles for Sale hate? I'm listening

it's pretty good but too much filler. the good stuff is great though.
>hey hey hey hey

its just rddit 'muh early beatles r nsync!!' posters

>>69465299
That's exactly what I thought about With the Beatles. BFS didn't have WTB'S highs, but I thought it was more consistent.

>>69465326
WTB had It Won't Be Long, All I've Got To Do, All My Loving, Please Mister Postman, Roll Over Beethoven, You Really Got a Hold on Me, Not a Second Time and Money. What BFS had?

Bfs is a fucking goat pop album.

>>69466393
No Reply
I'm a Loser
I'll Follow the Sun
Eight Days a Week
Every Little Thing
I Don't Want to Spoil the Party
What You're FUCKING doing you FUCK

george looks like a turnip

>>69465265
The fact that so many books still name the Beatles as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. Jazz critics have long recognized that the greatest jazz musicians of all times are Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all times. Classical critics rank the highly controversial Beethoven over classical musicians who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Rock critics are still blinded by commercial success. The Beatles sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore they must have been the greatest. Jazz critics grow up listening to a lot of jazz music of the past, classical critics grow up listening to a lot of classical music of the past. Rock critics are often totally ignorant of the rock music of the past, they barely know the best sellers. No wonder they will think that the Beatles did anything worthy of being saved.

>>69466743
wow, a bit mad there mate?

tldr

I mean half of it is covers, and the beatles entire schtick was their songwriting so I get why it isn't so widely liked. Some good vocal performances on there though.

And this might be a bit unrelated, but I've never understood why the beatles aren't more widely revered for popularizing the harsher, screamier vocals that defined punk and whatnot, considering they were doing it years before any of the other big rockers were.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukWaX13FBlc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSGbh2J0bB4

File: le scaruffi face.jpg (16KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 400x400px

>>69466793
lurk more

>>69466511
These songs are dated

>>69466812
You know long tall sally is a cover of a little richard song? And even elvis screamed before the beatles.

>>69466888
Yeah I know, those are both covers, but they play them so much more aggressively than pretty much anyone else at the time, and I can guarantee you elvis wasn't doing anything on that level.

>>69466812
The Stones, Kinks and Hendrix played a much bigger role in the conception of heavy rock (and later punk etc.) both vocally and instrumentally.

The Beatles influence on music was all about popcraft and revolutionizing recording techniques.

>>69467013
it's true anon, those covers WERE extremely edgy for the record buying public at the time.

>>69467117
yes I get that dude, what I'm questioning is why they weren't cited like that considering they were doing that shit years before any of those others were.

Also, Helter Skelter is heavier than anything The Stones, Kinks or Hendrix ever did.

>>69467426
I'm not the same one you're replying to but Helter Skelter pales in comparison to most of Hendrix's heavier works.

Probably because it's just more of the same at this point in their career. In fact, it was probably a step back considering the covers on the album. You can see why Rubber Soul needed to amp up the experimentation. That being said, I love, love, love, a lot of the tracks here, and it's a very enjoyable album for the most part. EDAW is probably one of my favourite Beatles tracks, in all honesty

>>69467426
They weren't really pioneering it though, bluesmen had been howling for decades before The Beatles came along. And when other bands were experimenting with heavier sounds/singing and having a far bigger impact on music culture in that regard it's not really a surprise The Beatles aren't cited for it.

>>69467506
FUCK. Forgot that Help came after this and not RS... Still, Help displays a maturer type of songwriting IMO, if not a more experimental pallete