If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(YouTube)   February 9, 1964: 728 studio audience members witness the dawn of a new music era   (youtube.com) divider line 100
    More: Cool, Ed Sullivan, Beatles, studio audience, British Invasion, new music, Sonny Liston, The Supremes, television shows  
•       •       •

3441 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 09 Feb 2014 at 10:30 AM (9 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



100 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-09 10:38:20 AM
Why didn't they play "Happiness is a Warm Gun"?
 
2014-02-09 10:43:24 AM

Jill Came Down With Two-Fifty: Why didn't they play "Happiness is a Warm Gun"?


Not revolutionary enough
 
2014-02-09 10:44:39 AM
Why link to a clip of their 1965 performance?
 
2014-02-09 10:47:12 AM
I am aware the link relates where they began (in the US), but I think it's important to remember to still hate Yoko Ono.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-IwdiRbS3U&feature=youtu.be#t=01m16s
 
2014-02-09 10:47:45 AM

Hawk24: Why link to a clip of their 1965 performance?


Only the old farts will notice.

/old fart
 
2014-02-09 10:50:25 AM
Why is the video shaking and warping? Was the atmosphere thicker back then?
 
2014-02-09 10:51:29 AM
 
2014-02-09 10:52:12 AM
I'm I the only one who's not a Beatles fan.
 
2014-02-09 10:56:21 AM

Hawk24: Why link to a clip of their 1965 performance?



The title of the clip is wrong.
 
2014-02-09 10:56:36 AM

miss diminutive: Why is the video shaking and warping? Was the atmosphere thicker back then?


I  remember it being mindblowing for my third grade little self, but no, I don't recall it making me quite so queasy as this.
 
2014-02-09 10:58:49 AM

wichitaleaf: I'm I the only one who's not a Beatles fan.


If you like pop music at all, you're a Beatles fan whether you admit/realize it or not.

I'll leave that here for you to ponder.
 
2014-02-09 10:58:50 AM

Queensowntalia: It was 50 years ago today.


Their best music was made at the tail end of the band's life, IMHO.
 
2014-02-09 11:00:18 AM

wichitaleaf: I'm I the only one who's not a Beatles fan.


Prefer the Rolling Stones from that era ( Gen-X here), but I have to give the Beatles cred...
 
2014-02-09 11:00:53 AM

miss diminutive: Why is the video shaking and warping? Was the atmosphere thicker back then?


Everything was thicker and longer back in the day
 
2014-02-09 11:04:30 AM

Forbidden Doughnut: Their best music was made at the tail end of the band's life, IMHO.


completely disagree.  Abbey Road is disjointed, with 2-3 outstanding songs and a bunch of dreck.  maxwell's silver hammer, anyone?

i way prefer the White Album and Revolver.


I had the chance to catch a Letterman taping about a decade ago, and while that was cool in itself, i kept telling my wife, "this is where hte Beatles happened!  right there!"
 
2014-02-09 11:05:02 AM

markfara: wichitaleaf: I'm I the only one who's not a Beatles fan.

If you like pop music at all, you're a Beatles fan whether you admit/realize it or not.

I'll leave that here for you to ponder.


And if you're not a fan of pop, you can recognize their music for the manufactured, godawful pap that it is
 
2014-02-09 11:08:13 AM
Are we seriously going to do this for every god damn event in the 60s for the rest of the decade, Boomers?
 
2014-02-09 11:09:10 AM

wichitaleaf: I'm I the only one who's not a Beatles fan.


You and this guy:

www.contactmusic.com
 
2014-02-09 11:14:51 AM

The Slush: markfara: wichitaleaf: I'm I the only one who's not a Beatles fan.

If you like pop music at all, you're a Beatles fan whether you admit/realize it or not.

I'll leave that here for you to ponder.

And if you're not a fan of pop, you can recognize their music for the manufactured, godawful pap that it is


Some people feel about pop the way I feel about contemporary C&W, apparently. Which is cool.
 
2014-02-09 11:14:57 AM

Ishkur: Are we seriously going to do this for every god damn event in the 60s for the rest of the decade, Boomers?


At least all the way until Altamont, so suck it up, buttercup.
 
2014-02-09 11:15:53 AM

rickythepenguin: I had the chance to catch a Letterman taping about a decade ago, and while that was cool in itself, i kept telling my wife, "this is where hte Beatles happened! right there!"


An old friend whose dad produced the show was there. Crazy.
 
2014-02-09 11:18:19 AM
The fact that so many books still name the Beatles "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 worth of being saved.


/much more interesting than yet another "Beatles were a boyband" argument made by retards.
 
2014-02-09 11:18:33 AM

MFAWG: At least all the way until Altamont, so suck it up, buttercup.


No. Die with some dignity grandpa. Your youth isn't special just because you lived through it.
 
2014-02-09 11:19:32 AM

rickythepenguin: maxwell's silver hammer, anyone?


I like that song, but only because that's my older sisters nickname for me.... I don't know why.
 
2014-02-09 11:20:05 AM
I didn't see it, I was busy gestating.
 
2014-02-09 11:26:43 AM

DrBenway: An old friend whose dad produced the show was there. Crazy.


someone on a grateful dead board i frequent, still has the ticket stub from either Atlanta or Dallas, perhaps Florida, whatever, on the '64 tour.  he was about 10 or so and said his sisters took him.  doesn't remember much about it other than the incessant SCREAMING but, yeah, he saw the beatles play.
 
2014-02-09 11:28:07 AM

Ishkur: Are we seriously going to do this for every god damn event in the 60s for the rest of the decade, Boomers?


You mean post clips here that you by no means will be obliged to watch or comment on? Yeah, that will suck for you, you poor dear. Seriously heartbreaking even.
 
2014-02-09 11:31:57 AM
Didn't they have to rush the release of their debut album because they were booked to be on the show? I remember reading something about that, but I forget where. Or maybe I was drunk.
 
2014-02-09 11:35:32 AM

iron_city_ap: Didn't they have to rush the release of their debut album because they were booked to be on the show? I remember reading something about that, but I forget where. Or maybe I was drunk.


No...their first album came out nearly a year earlier and their second was released in late November 1963.
 
2014-02-09 11:41:34 AM
If you don't like The Beatles you're stupid and should not have children.
 
2014-02-09 11:41:39 AM

LewDux: Everything was thicker and longer back in the day


Is this a reference to pubic hair? Because that is certainly the case, judging from what I've seen on the internets.
 
2014-02-09 11:50:23 AM

FeedTheCollapse: The fact that so many books still name the Beatles "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 worth of being saved.


/much more interesting than yet another "Beatles were a boyband" argument made by retards.


Though, there as probably as much bad jazz ad their is bad pop music with also a rabid fan base that is constantly going on about some horrible jazz musician that no one has ever heard of and no one needs to hear of in the first place.  The kind of Jazz hipster who has never heard of Preservation Hall but can tell you about the latest French Jazz fusion bongo player.
 
2014-02-09 11:55:49 AM

Hawk24: iron_city_ap: Didn't they have to rush the release of their debut album because they were booked to be on the show? I remember reading something about that, but I forget where. Or maybe I was drunk.

No...their first album came out nearly a year earlier and their second was released in late November 1963.


I remember something that they had to rush (US release date, maybe) because of the show.
 
2014-02-09 11:57:54 AM

rickythepenguin: Forbidden Doughnut: Their best music was made at the tail end of the band's life, IMHO.

completely disagree.  Abbey Road is disjointed, with 2-3 outstanding songs and a bunch of dreck.  maxwell's silver hammer, anyone?

i way prefer the White Album and Revolver.


I had the chance to catch a Letterman taping about a decade ago, and while that was cool in itself, i kept telling my wife, "this is where hte Beatles happened!  right there!"


I also went to a Letteman show a couple of years ago and said the same thing. Coldplay performed for the show that day. Not a big fan of theirs, but they were great and it was cool to see a huge band perform on that stage.
 
2014-02-09 11:58:07 AM

rickythepenguin: Forbidden Doughnut: Their best music was made at the tail end of the band's life, IMHO.

completely disagree.  Abbey Road is disjointed, with 2-3 outstanding songs and a bunch of dreck.  maxwell's silver hammer, anyone?

i way prefer the White Album and Revolver.


I had the chance to catch a Letterman taping about a decade ago, and while that was cool in itself, i kept telling my wife, "this is where hte Beatles happened!  right there!"


You think Abbey Road is disjointed, filled with dreck, and you like The White Album?
 
2014-02-09 11:58:40 AM

abhorrent1: If you don't like The Beatles you're stupid and should not have children.


People like what they like and don't like what they don't. If someone doesn't like them, that's one thing. Not being able to see their importance, though, is simply myopic.

FeedTheCollapse: The fact that so many books still name the Beatles "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.


Wow. Just. . .wow.
 
2014-02-09 12:06:46 PM

FeedTheCollapse: The fact that so many books still name the Beatles "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 worth of being saved.


/much more interesting than yet another "Beatles were a boyband" argument made by retards.


I could swear that I read this exact passage in a thread a week ago and thought it was pretentious and out of place even then. Transplanted to this thread it resembles a turd in a punch bowl.
 
2014-02-09 12:07:57 PM

jonohull: rickythepenguin: Forbidden Doughnut: Their best music was made at the tail end of the band's life, IMHO.

completely disagree.  Abbey Road is disjointed, with 2-3 outstanding songs and a bunch of dreck.  maxwell's silver hammer, anyone?

i way prefer the White Album and Revolver.


I had the chance to catch a Letterman taping about a decade ago, and while that was cool in itself, i kept telling my wife, "this is where hte Beatles happened!  right there!"

You think Abbey Road is disjointed, filled with dreck, and you like The White Album?


Well, for one thing, the Ringo songs are better. Maxwell may be silly, but Octopus's Garden is thoroughly cringe-worthy, probably earning my vote for worst Beatles song ever. Side 2 of Abbey Road hangs together quite nicely though.
 
2014-02-09 12:08:07 PM

miss diminutive: Why is the video shaking and warping? Was the atmosphere thicker back then?


I think the video was drunk.

Maybe it was all the LSD the Beatles did later on.
 
2014-02-09 12:08:41 PM

Ishkur: Are we seriously going to do this for every god damn event in the 60s for the rest of the decade, Boomers?


There were The Beatles™...then crazy, electronic thingies started coming from the music box.
 
2014-02-09 12:10:19 PM
Also from 1964, yet far less appreciated....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8PaTfyVVMk
 
2014-02-09 12:12:47 PM

Queensowntalia: It was 50 years ago today.


THAT should've been the headline.
 
2014-02-09 12:15:01 PM

red5ish: FeedTheCollapse: The fact that so many books still name the Beatles "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 worth of being saved.


/much more interesting than yet another "Beatles were a boyband" argument made by retards.

I could swear that I read this exact passage in a thread a week ago and thought it was pretentious and out of place even then. Transplanted to this thread it resembles a turd in a punch bowl.


It would be nice if people would source their blobs o' type when they copy-and-paste them, wouldn't it?
 
2014-02-09 12:18:49 PM

LewDux: miss diminutive: Why is the video shaking and warping? Was the atmosphere thicker back then?

Everything was thicker and longer back in the day


media.tumblr.com
 
2014-02-09 12:21:16 PM

red5ish: FeedTheCollapse: The fact that so many books still name the Beatles "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 worth of being saved.


/much more interesting than yet another "Beatles were a boyband" argument made by retards.

I could swear that I read this exact passage in a thread a week ago and thought it was pretentious and out of place even then. Transplanted to this thread it resembles a turd in a punch bowl.


Heh... I find it funny that the main argument of the criticism, the idea that the Beatles were considered great because they were the biggest band is undermined by the "not true, by the way" bit.

The Beatles were transformative, like Elvis and Buddy Holly. They influenced a generation of musicians, some of whom might have been better than the Beatles, but never had the influence over the genre the Fab Four had. Anybody who disagrees is ignoring history. Rock and Roll doesn't evolve without  The Beatles storming the scene in the early 60s and leveraging their popularity to bring in world music influences.

Were they "the most" influential? That is something you cannot determine. Would there be The Beatles without an Elvis? Elvis also inspired the members of Led Zeppelin, though their music would not have been possible without the groundwork laid by the Beatles before them. Every few years, there is some sort of groundbreaking act, popular or not, that inspires future acts (Pixies come to mind) in indelible ways. I wouldn't argue any particular artist or group as "most influential" - but rather that some were pivotal in their time.

Popularity is a definitive quality of any transformational act. Acts that are buried in obscurity, no matter how loved, or how much "the did it first" may have influenced those transformative acts, but by themselves, they were not pivotal or influential on the genre as a whole.
 
2014-02-09 12:24:51 PM

jonohull: You think Abbey Road is disjointed, filled with dreck, and you like The White Album?



white album isn't "filled" with dreck.

and i always say about White Album threads, when they released teh solo acoustic/harmonium "Gently Weeps" on the anthology, that was the version that should have been released, not the cock rock wank pentatonic solo Clapton had.  the songs is vastly more powerful when stripped to its essence.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaY7TwMBHuc

this is what they should have released!
 
2014-02-09 12:29:49 PM

LesserEvil: he Beatles were transformative, like Elvis and Buddy Holly. They influenced a generation of musicians, some of whom might have been better than the Beatles, but never had the influence over the genre the Fab Four had


bob weir tells the story of how in 1964, Jerry was the leader of "Mother McCree's Uptown Jug Champions", featuring Weir on the jug, Jerry on banjo, and Pig and I thiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiink Billy K were in the fold.  Not phil, though.

anways, he's like, "so one day we went and saw 'A Hard Day's Night'.  the next day i traded in my jug for a gibson electric guitar, and we pretty much said, 'let's play some electric rock and roll."
 
2014-02-09 12:42:35 PM

Ishkur: MFAWG: At least all the way until Altamont, so suck it up, buttercup.

No. Die with some dignity grandpa. Your youth isn't special just because you lived through it.


Please. They're starting to realize just how badly they screwed this country once they grew up. I'm willing to to let them have these little moments.
 
2014-02-09 12:46:53 PM

FeedTheCollapse: The fact that so many books still name the Beatles "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 worth of being saved.


/much more interesting than yet another "Beatles were a boyband" argument made by retards.


The best jazz musician ever was Miles Davis. The best classical composer was Mozart.
 
2014-02-09 12:48:11 PM

The Slush: And if you're not a fan of pop, you can recognize their music for the manufactured, godawful pap that it is


Really? You think that's an accurate description of the Beatles' music? Have you heard any of it?
 
Displayed 50 of 100 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report