What is the appeal?

You had to be there man. Pop album before this were bland and following all the safey rules. Just listen to singles from 1967 like Cherry Cherry (neil diamond) and mcarthur park also from 1967. Then listen to what the beatles did

I listened to them for years and got fucking obsessed with them, and shortly after, sick of them. But when I loved them this was one of my favorites.

Some general reasons I enjoyed it so much:

I enjoyed a lot of the vocal performances on the album, especially from McCartney She's Leaving Home and Lovely Rita. A lot of the vocal performances really shine here (...barring Ringo)


I really enjoyed a lot of the instrumentation. They were pretty god damn uninteresting in the early years because it was just basic 2-guitar-rock. During 66 and 67 they started to experiment a lot more, this album has a lot of great use of pianos, harpsichord, and string sections. On She's Leaving Home and A Day in the Life the orchestras are just beautiful.

Lyrically it's...alright. A lot of pretty good stories now and then but lyrics aren't really the focus as much here.

Hope this helps.

>>70728974
This. It's one of those things that was extraordinary at the time. Now to be fair it's still great music, but it's more influential than it is good.

Frankly it's not even in my top 5 Beatle albums. It is quite good though.

>>70728906
idk dude i just enjoy the music on the album. thats all there is to it

>>70728906
I don't think it's close to being the best album ever or the best Beatles album but it's a diverse and pretty experience. It does go without saying that it's probably one of the best-produced albums of its era, and the now-famous trickery that went into making it still retains a great deal of charm. Not to mention A Day In the Life, which makes for an epic conclusion.

>>70728974
>>70729033
fair enough, i can see that for the time it was probably really amazing. But nowadays where music is so fucking extreme and readily available, its just not the same i imagine

>>70728906
Its a good album, but my #1 favorite song is Strawberry fields, just for the amount of technical brilliance that went into making it. They pulled out all the stops to make two takes at two keys merge as one. The 25 takes they record offer a great way to listen to the development of the song from acoustic slide guitar version (take 7) to the bombastic horns and percussion take 24

>>70728906
I only like the Ringo track.
Revolver was better desu.

>>70729101
Music isn't a competition. That's a bad mindset.

>>70728974
>Pop album before this were bland and following all the safey rules.

That's honestly bullshit. Zappa, the Beach Boys, and Dylan were releasing cutting edge music and making art of the album. Zappa and Dylan were particularly overt in establishing the album as an art form by dropping rock's first double albums; additionally, in Dylan's case, loading the entire side of one record up with just a single song, and in Zappa's case, utilizing motifs to make the album feel cohesive.

Sgt. Pepper's was groundbreaking only to people who were deaf to the precursors of the "album as a single work of art" concept.

>>70729208
Please don't bring up Zappa as being culturally relevant. May as well throw Captain Beefheart in there.

Pretty complex for a straightforward pop album with each track having its own separate thing it does well. It's complexities come into more harmonically complex bits where it's a lot of things playing at once with chord progressions that aren't standard and simple four chord ones all the time. Very grandiose, the most grandiose pop album ever. Signal processing that went into the studio production making of the record influential to practically all music that has existed since especially these days.

>>70729143
>Music isn't a competition
could you elaborate please?
not memeing, genuinely asking

>>70730067
What I meant was like, music isn't about this album sounding better than that album or doing something better than that album. Every album is different and stands on its own merits. I was mostly replying to
>But nowadays where music is so fucking extreme and readily available
I just don't know what that's supposed to mean. Good music is always going to be good music. I mean think about how old classical music is.

File: Why.png (120KB, 1024x920px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 1024x920px

>I give a pretty good review
>Nobody cared

>>70729233
That's my point. People were utilizing the album format as art well before Pepper's, but that was the first album to reach a big enough audience to really have cultural impact. It's a false claim to say it was revolutionary in the sense that it had the ideas first; it was revolution in the sense that it was the first to have those ideas heard.

>>70730950
It was the first to have the concept-album idea and not sound like dog shit. Zappa and Beefheart can have innovated all they want 6 months in advance, it's not good music and barely classifies as rock to begin with

>>70729121
Strawberry Fields Forever was recorded at the beginning of the Sgt. Pepper Lonely Hearts Club Band sessions my dude, it was part of the album but EMI wanted a single so yeah.

>>70730950
It's about getting the concept and making it available to everyone, also every single part of the production is amazing, The Beatles started to use techniques no other band was using.

>>70731002
>It was the first to have the concept-album idea and not sound like dog shit. Zappa and Beefheart can have innovated all they want 6 months in advance, it's not good music and barely classifies as rock to begin with
Isn't that the point of being innovative to begin with? And let's not forget that Captain's attempts at commercialization produced some of his worst albums and that Zappa was disgusted of any commercial success.

>>70729335
And that's why most people have a problem with it on the other hand. While being harmonically complex and having great production, it was still safe, with bland lyrics and insincere.

I like the mono version slightly better.