I don't like The Beatles, am I the only one?

[Repentant subjectivist]

I've generally been very unimpressed with the classic artists like The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Michael Jackson etc. The Beatles is probably the one that dumbfounded me the most, because I find their music to be not only boring/uninteresting but almost offensively bad.

 

[Mal]

I've generally been very unimpressed with the classic artists like The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Michael Jackson etc. The Beatles is probably the one that dumbfounded me the most, because I find their music to be not only boring/uninteresting but almost offensively bad.

What makes the Beatles boring, uninteresting and offensively bad to you? Is this another subjectivism that you should try to get around? Do you like any pop/rock music? What music do you mostly listen to?

 

[rank]

You can't compare BB after Brian's troubles to before. Quadrophenia and Who's Next were the 70's. Others Who albums were less good.

I was replying to Tim and for me BB & Who are far far away from the Beatles magic. I own all their discs of course but to be honest, lots of filler on LPs & 45's !
Quite disappointed by the latest 'Pet Sounds' box set by the way, no full concert (which is what we miss the most!), no video, let's not even talk about it, must be too expensive for these cheapskates, a useless BRD and sessions already partly published that we will listen well? Maybe once!

 

[rank]

What makes the Beatles boring, uninteresting and offensively bad to you? Is this another subjectivism that you should try to get around? Do you like any pop/rock music? What music do you mostly listen to?

I already asked, no answer, people here come to let off steam.
Oh yes I read Abba! Abba? Abba! I only remember one thing about them, the white mini-skirt of the thin blonde ah and the Sisters had covered on stage in Germany one of their immortal compositions, Gimme (3X), well it must have been for fun.

 

[rank]

Currently, I'm listening to Pentangle.

I would have gone to see Sex Swing at the weekend, but I've got Covid, so missed out.

The previous weekend, I saw a bill that included the atmospheric electronica of The Breedling, the noise of Machiavellian Art (lovely people who gave me a badge ) and the wonderful post punk pop of Cowtown.

Next weekend (assuming I no longer have the lurgy), I'll be going to see the truly excellent folk musician/singer Eliza Carthy.

Some of the artists I have seen at least three times:- Whitesnake, Marillion, Diamond Head, Hey Colossus, Spiritualized, Wilco, Tinariwen, Richard Thompson, Steve Earle, Swans, Cowtown.

Ourk.

 

[rank]

They were in the right place at the right time. If it hadn't been the Beatles, it'd have been the Stones, the Kinks or the Animals.

Not sure that without the Beatles, these groups would have existed.

 

[rank]

With me it is like I always return to the base, and that is the old blues done by the original artist and Beatles and Stones.
And all the other music I play is like the wall around the fundaments.

Few interesting things in the disco wave itself (Belolo-Morali productions like the Village people or Patrick Juvet are painful), but it started the dance vogue, club music.
Which in its rock version has produced many masterpieces (B Movie, Duran Duran, New Order, Billy Idol to name just a few).
Jazz is a bit like the Dead, impossible to listen to it in its normal state because the people who play it are not clear either.
So-called serious music (the real term for "classical") demands attention. But you can play it while doing something else during the boring passages.
Wow, almost 300 posts, the discussion is now moving towards musical tastes. Vast topic.

 

[McAllister]

Yes

 

[Mal]

Not sure that without the Beatles, these groups would have existed.

These groups were heavily influenced by American blues, rock & roll, R&B, and jazz, so I think they would have existed. But would they have taken the path of more complex/psychedelic rock without the Beatles? Would "2000 Light Years from home" exist? Their Satanic Majesties was criticised for being too derivative of Sgt Pepper - which is unfair, but the Beatles were (surely) an influence.

 

[rank]

Yes, an a contrario influence. I like these too (I even have Burdon & Davies solo discs = phew!), but again, lot of fillers everywhere.
That said it's better than many 1 hit wonders like Charlatans, Stone roses, Verve, XTC & so on.

 

[GroeneLeeuw]

I'm a fanatic music lover
But I just don't get the hype about The Beatles
Am I the only one?

Yes, you are special.

 

[IPunchCholla]

I already asked, no answer, people here come to let off steam.
Oh yes I read Abba! Abba? Abba! I only remember one thing about them, the white mini-skirt of the thin blonde ah and the Sisters had covered on stage in Germany one of their immortal compositions, Gimme (3X), well it must have been for fun.

It’s hard to say why some artists don’t click for people, at least it is for me. One thing I have noticed, is that I tend to enjoy rhythm, timbre, and harmonics over melody. I like music that plays with layered structures and builds then breaks expectations. My guess is that the Beatles early music, strikes my contemporary ears as simplistic bubblegum pop, and they’re later music, which is much more in my wheelhouse, I grew up hearing at the supermarket and shopping mall, so the playfulness and experimentation is just played out for me. So I can recognize the brilliance and importance of the music and even find myself highly engaged for one or two songs (I will admit that when it comes to “when you get to the bottom, you go back to the top” I can’t help but sing along in my head.

But as much as I admire their artistic output, I never choose to listen to them. Or many from that era. The Animals and the Stones being two exceptions.

 

[rank]

I like the Beatles because I was already there when they started, I like a lot of songs they wrote and the ones I like less I still find good. They transcend a lot of musical genres into one, their own. But don't worry, I also listen to recent stuff.

 

[Balle Clorin]

I do not like U2 , I hate every sing they make. I cannot stand Shania Twain either . Beatles? I liked Lady Madonna wham I was nine ..

 

[Ported]

I recon we could all start a thread with
"I don't like <insert artist> , am I the only one?"
Not sure it achieves much ... I prefer "isn't the diversity of music a great thing". Glad we don't all like the same stuff meself.

 

[TurtlePaul]

Listening to the Beatles for the first time in 2024 would ge boring given how much pop rock has built upon their foundation.

In the mid-60s after decades of doo-wop, Elvis and the Beach Boys being pop music, the Beatles were a revelation.

It is unfair to look at them as formulaic bland music when they were the first to create the formula. They cant help that six decades later their music is too familiar as to be boring.

 

[rank]

I do not like U2 , I hate every sing they make. I cannot stand Shania Twain either . Beatles? I liked Lady Madonna wham I was nine ..

Be positive, punk !

 

[Robin L]

Listening to the Beatles for the first time in 2024 would ge boring given how much pop rock has built upon their foundation.

In the mid-60s after decades of doo-wop, Elvis and the Beach Boys being pop music, the Beatles were a revelation.

It is unfair to look at them as formulaic bland music when they were the first to create the formula. They cant help that six decades later their music is too familiar as to be boring.

But it wasn't "decades of doo-wop, Elvis and the Beach Boys". The Beatles started out in the late 1950s and developed their sound based on the work of others, doing lots of cover tunes when they started. The first single of the Beatles appeared in 1962 - "Love Me Do". The Beach Boys appeared with "Surfin'" in 1961 with the first appearance of that song on an album in 1962. Elvis broke nationally with "Heartbreak Hotel" in 1956. Doo-Wop was still happening in the 1960s. Doo-Wop appeared in African American communities in the 1940s (as did many other templates for Rock 'n' Roll) but achieved mainstream success in the 1950s and 1960s. "Memories of El Monte" by the Penguins (written by Frank Zappa) appeared in 1963.

The Beatles emerged alongside other musical streams of what became known as rock 'n' roll, but there were other musical artists that emerged alongside them that would be a revelation at the time as well. The Everly Brothers were an obvious influence as were Buddy Holly and the Crickets. Dion (with the Belmonts and the Del-Satins) made hard rockin' hits just as the Beatles started their rise to fame. The Beatles did not emerge in isolation - they were a well-groomed and very well managed popular act that got on the playing field at exactly the right time. Factors other than the Beatles' musical skill were what pushed them to the "toppermost of the poppermost" in a very crowded field.

 

[Repentant subjectivist]

What makes the Beatles boring, uninteresting and offensively bad to you? Is this another subjectivism that you should try to get around? Do you like any pop/rock music? What music do you mostly listen to?

I listen to most every genre under the sun. Metal, rap, pop, classical, post rock, electronica, trap, hard rock etc.

I just find The Beatles' songs to be boring and uninteresting. Obviously at the time they released the music it was probably very original and exciting, but by the time I started seriously listening to music (early-mid 2000s) the competition was just overwhelming. And since I don't have any reason to have any special relationship with the band, they are to me like some random generic band that sells zero records of music I'm not interested in. Except everyone keeps ravin' about how they're the best band ever, lol.

 

[mhardy6647]

Well -- yeah -- Alanis Morissette's All I Really Want does sound quite a bit like Tomorrow Never Knows.