When will the whole "overrating 50-30 year old pop bands

>>73824999
The Beatles and Beach Boys spammers are just underagers from reddlt

File: 3045704651_fd5ce3eca4.jpg (77KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 500x375px

>>73824999
>the Beatles were no better than Tame Impala or even Justin fucking Bieber

>>73825057
It's fucking true

>>73824999
You got trips but you're full of shit and know nothing about music, especially The Beatles. KYS!

>>73825013
You didn't get trips but follow the above advice anyway!

>>73824999
the beatles are good and helped pioneer psychedelic rock, most likely all the artists you like were influenced by them, stop being retarded.

>>73825057
DON'T EVER USE THE IMAGE OF #6 IN VAIN TO GET YOUR POINT ACROSS ON /mu/ EVER AGAIN FAGGOT!

File: 5279620705_f2b85127c7_z.jpg (136KB, 640x485px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 640x485px

>>73825086

>>73825057
That's absolutely correct, i don't see the reason you need restate it.
>>73825072
>>73825075
Typical butthurt beatles fanboys failing for the popular narrative. The Beatles never invented anything nor pioneered anything, i'll assume you must be underage to think so.

File: 1498952381570.png (383KB, 598x628px) Image search: [Google]

383KB, 598x628px

>>73825094
>nor pioneered anything
>double tracking
>raga in pop
>music videos
>psychedelic to mass audiences
I understand that you get a raging boner thinking you're more enlightened for thinking that one of the most famous bands in history is trash, but you actually just look like a retard my man. Their influence in music alone is enough to make them one of the most important bands in history. In all honesty, I've only ever heard middle schoolers express the opinion that beatles aren't good, and that's because they listen to shit like Green Day and don't find the raw angst they need in actual good music like the Beatles. Even if you drop the idea that they didn't pioneer anything, which they did, their catalog of music is fucking fantastic, and you'd have to be absolutely pretentious to pretend like it's not something special.

>>73825094
But they'll get upset, they just KNOW that the Beatles were important, great, influential on great music, that there is just SOMETHING about them that proves they were good, when the reality is that The Beatles never did anything worth saving.

>>73825162
>never did anything worth saving
(not true by the way)

>>73825171
>>never did anything worth saving
>(not true by the way)
(not true by the way)

>>73825160
>raga in pop
>music videos
>psychedelic to mass audiences
These don't fucking matter, but it does prove that they were hacks who fostered gimmicks into the mainstream for a living, that was their talent. How boring

File: 1498356880888.png (103KB, 275x269px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 275x269px

>>73825178
come on now, you're just embarrassing yourself

>>73825160
>thinking that a pop rock band is trash in the same vein as justin bieber means i consider myself enlightened
My opinion is only somewhat unpopular and nothing deep about it, nice strawman you created though. Also this>>73825191

File: 1499499424560.png (306KB, 345x366px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 345x366px

>>73825191
>claims they didn't pioneer anything
>pioneers something
>calls them gimmicks
this is actually the worst argument I've ever seen

>>73825201
>same vein as justin beiber
I refuse to believe that even someone as retarded as you believes that

>>73824999
He said, while flooding the board with more Beatles talk.

Well done, OP.

>>73825216
>h in
That's your counter-argument?
Ouch, that was even more pathetic than the entirety of The Beatles' artistic accomplishment, why do you post here again?

>>73825225
Keep calling me a retard that might make you intelligent and right despite not being so

>>73824999
I'm pretty sure Helter Skelter drove all the underage girls wild, hence the harems of schoolgirls that went on to follow Black Sabbath and the infamous female toddler obsession with Whitesnake in the late 80s.

>>73825243
Ignore him, his brain's clearly melted from years of prolonged exposure to The Beatles

>>73825254
what's your opinion of captain beefheart?

>>73825238
what's something that's innovative that isn't gimmicky to you then? And what makes something gimmicky? Just because something isn't traditional means it's pointless? That seems like some pretty bad taste desu, if I was you I'd be ashamed.

Considering it was the start of a period in which truly global bands were feasible, is it any surprise that the Beatles aren't still remembered 50 years on?

>>73825243
>doesn't explain why you can compare the beatles and justin bieber aside from them both being pop
i'm just asking a question, retard

>>73825254
Yeah i know man, cultural brainwashing is the strongest yet most unnoticed weapon in the playing field

>>73825286
>cultural brainwashing
>muh sheeple
grow up

>>73825285
I'm implying that both share the same music quality and that's Beatles never invented or innovated anything
>>73825291
cultural brainwashing is the most efficient way for the dudes that produce them to become rich as fuck. You're a naive idiot if you don't think that culture gets directed to a position that offers more money to certain individuals. Means are irrelevant only the fat cash matters and they're going to use any tool necessary to obtain it.

>>73825263
>that's innovative that isn't gimmicky to you then? And what makes something gimmicky? Just because something isn't traditional means it's pointless? That seems like some pretty bad taste desu, if I was you I'd be ashamed.
I'm not going to argue any further with an ant like yourself, the following bands are actually innovative without descending the brain-melting garbage that is The Beatles discography.

Captain Beefheart
Faust
The Velvet Underground
Pere Ubu
Bob Dylan
Neu
Suicide
Tim Buckley
Royal Trux
John Fahey
Robert Wyatt
Slint

But I doubt you could even comprehend why this music is superior to the 'music' of The Beatles, you fucking farm animal.

>>73825326
>culture gets directed to a position
what does this even mean
do you also think in this kind of word salad?

>>73825331
where are the beach boys???

>>73825331
>bob dylan
>music

>>73825331
don't forget type o negative =^)

>>73825339
>dudes culturally promote The Beatles as the saviors of music
>brainwashed public holds the religiously fixed opinion that beatles=good
>results to a lot of money for the big head
It this that hard for you to gasp?

File: 1446157040523.jpg (15KB, 435x435px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 435x435px

>still being in your 'wah wah the beatles suck' phase
God, I'm glad I never went through that.

>>73825331
so you just have something against pop music in general then. nice b8 thread.

>>73825372
so, advertising
great insight!

>>73825389
>advertising can't be achieved through brainwashing tactics
>advertising can't be malicious
>advertising is only good and fair, no in between
>When my Beatles where aggressively shilled and planted into public consciousness it was only fair because they deserved it but sure let me bash this pure soundcloud nobody that tries to to get a few more listens
>when the legends did it it was okay

>>73825454
the great thing about advertising is anyone can do it
some people even do it for free

>>73825331
Hahaha I can't quite believe how stupid you're being. Criticising others of being drones and slaves to "cultural brainwashing" for enjoying the Beatles when you're nothing but a Scaruffi drone. I used to feel the same way back when I was about 16-17, then I decided to stop being a pretentious cunt. I gave the Beatles a chance and realised that they've made some pretty excellent music, Rubber Soul being my personal favourite.

>>73825465
Reread my post and learn the distinction between advertising, aggressive shilling and shifting the popular opinion through dirty tricks and non-ethical ways to achieve popularity.
I bet you also think Ed Sheeran was solely made famous by the people and that he wasn't shilled as an established "future pop star" from the get go.

>>73825541
>shifting the popular opinion through dirty tricks and non-ethical ways to achieve popularity.
are you suggesting The Beatles did this?

>>73825549
I'm suggesting Mr. Epstein did it and quite effectively if i say so. Also 99.9% of pop stars got famous through this.

>>73825578
which dirty tricks and non-ethical ways did he employ?

>>73825586
internet is your friend use it a learn not need for me to post whole texts or waste my time finding the sources for you

>>73825640
ah, so you've got nothing
it's ok, if it helps i didn't really expect you to come up with anything

>>73825666
you would have already find everything if you used the time searching instead of baiting me but i guess "winning" 4chan arguments is more important.
bb

>>73825731
if i was baiting then why would i care? like you went from brainwashing to advertising to some mysterious claim about ethics
like, ok i get it you hate the beatles and wish they weren't rammed down your throat 24/7, but they are, for a number of reasons (people's taste, timing, heavy marketing, image, attitude, humour, cocky one-liners, savviness, and catchy accessible music) and spreading rumours around on a somalian particle physics forum won't change that

>>73824999
>>73825013
>>73825067
>>73825178
>>73825201
>>73825254
>>73825326
https://youtu.be/N2Cjyghh_Bs
>fucken'

>>73824999
It's also an obnoxious reality outside of this board, OP. People grantin' leniency to artists of yesteryear 'cause they've been 'round awhile despite the likeliness that many of those same people would dismiss that same artist as mainstream trash were they up and comin' in the present. I find it funny whenever people seem to believe popular music ever had any artistic integrity, as if it wasn't always a product of producers' fine-tunin' of each note to a science of what people are most likely to like to listen to. It's all perspective and unfortunately regarding many different media, people tend to automatically associate what is old/new with what's good/bad.