|
|
Post by matt on Aug 5, 2015 12:27:43 GMT -5
www.esquire.com/entertainment/music/interviews/a36899/keith-richards-interview-0915/Really bizaare - he believes the album was just random nonsense with "no roots". Hang on a minute - it's the most rooted Beatles album there is. People still can't get their heads around the fact that this album's influences aren't the usual derivative influences of a rock band - i.e. Rhythm and blues, folk, etc. The influences of Sgt Pepper are, in fact, a unique take on more antiquated genres of Victorian and Edwardian English theatre - music hall, vaudeville, in addition to the influence of northern English brass bands that played in the bandstand on the park that would have bene a common feature in many working class northern English towns. All this is turned on its head with the use of psychedelic drugs. So it does have its roots considering it mixes past English culture with contemporary culture. I suspect the 'randomness' of it is because its influences were genuinely different from any of the band's peers so perhaps doesn't have that universal appeal and familiarity that other genres have. But it takes something special to take unfashionable and archaic forms of music and update it into something so bizaare and surreal. It's a shame Richards doesn't 'get it', but as far as I'm concerned, its more original and less derivative than any Rolling Stones album and other rock bands from that era. And it's still the most focused and inventive Beatles album there is in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by boneheadsbolero on Aug 5, 2015 12:30:05 GMT -5
If Keith wants to comment about musical rubbish he need look no further
than every single Rolling Stones album since 1974.
|
|
|
|
Post by Headmaster on Aug 5, 2015 12:38:52 GMT -5
Exile>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Sargeant
|
|
|
|
Post by richie4422 on Aug 5, 2015 13:16:05 GMT -5
Even random nonsense is still better than their music after '76.
|
|
|
|
Post by jordan71421 on Aug 5, 2015 13:30:26 GMT -5
It's weird, I do like the Beatles more than the Stones, but my favorite album from either of them is Exile. It's so amazing from start to finish
|
|
|
|
Post by theyknowwhatimean on Aug 5, 2015 13:48:57 GMT -5
"I resent the implication that the Stones are like revolutionaries and that the Beatles weren't. If the Stones were - or are - then the Beatles really were. They're not in the same class. Music wise or power wise. Never were. And Mick (and Keith) always resented it."
-John Lennon
|
|
|
|
Post by theyknowwhatimean on Aug 5, 2015 13:53:24 GMT -5
Some of the things Keith has also said...
-Oasis are c u n t s and their music's "tinny".
-Led Zeppelin never "took off"
-The only Bowie song he could remember was 'Changes'. The rest, he said, "is all fucking posing. It's nothing to do with music"
The guy's a living legend, and an icon of rock, but he doesn't half talk shite!
|
|
|
|
Post by jaq515 on Aug 5, 2015 13:59:27 GMT -5
its all part of the game isn't it
Im sure other fans, other generations, even our selves will look back at snap shot comments of the gallagher bros and their comments will looks as ridiculous
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2015 14:03:07 GMT -5
I think he's being a bit harsh on Pepper there but he also said the same about Satanic Majesties, which is one of my favourite Stones' albums. While Pepper is a good album and rightly respected for its innovation, I do think parts of it sound a tad dated when compared to Revolver, which to my ears sounds incredibly fresh. Perhaps this is due to some of the sounds effects that were used being associated so strongly with the time and the whole 'summer of love' vibe.
I don't think Keith is bitter about the Beatles, or not to the degree that Mick is/was.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Henry Holliday on Aug 5, 2015 14:16:57 GMT -5
Keith Richards is about the only person I would get starstruck meeting; he's said somewhat controversial stuff like this for years....it's what he does.
God bless.
|
|
|
|
Post by sortitout1471 on Aug 5, 2015 14:20:45 GMT -5
Yeh Keith is always being contrary for the sake of it. Wouldn't take much notice.
'A Day In The Life' alone says shut up Keith.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2015 14:52:39 GMT -5
It can have a debate about the "tad sound" of the thing, if you want, but the songs are here: A Day In The Life, She's Leaving Home, Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds, Being For The Benefit of Mr.Kite, etc. Plus, you can add Strawberry Fields Forever and Penny Lane, that are of the same era. So call it rubbish...
As much as I love The Stones, Keith is fucking exagerrating here. After, which one os better between "Revolver" and "Pepper", I think it's everyone own right.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2015 14:59:50 GMT -5
It can have a debate about the "tad sound" of the thing, if you want, but the songs are here: A Day In The Life, She's Leaving Home, Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds, Being For The Benefit of Mr.Kite, etc. Plus, you can add Strawberry Fields Forever and Penny Lane, that are of the same era. So call it rubbish... As much as I love The Stones, Keith is fucking exagerrating here. After, which one os better between "Revolver" and "Pepper", I think it's everyone own right. Don't get me wrong, I love Pepper and most of the songs you mentioned are up there with The Beatles' best. And when I say it sounds dated, it's not a slight on the album at all. It's almost become a victim of its own success that it's so heavily associated with the era, in the same way that I think Morning Glory sounds more dated than Definitely Maybe. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2015 17:54:30 GMT -5
It can have a debate about the "tad sound" of the thing, if you want, but the songs are here: A Day In The Life, She's Leaving Home, Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds, Being For The Benefit of Mr.Kite, etc. Plus, you can add Strawberry Fields Forever and Penny Lane, that are of the same era. So call it rubbish... As much as I love The Stones, Keith is fucking exagerrating here. After, which one os better between "Revolver" and "Pepper", I think it's everyone own right. Don't get me wrong, I love Pepper and most of the songs you mentioned are up there with The Beatles' best. And when I say it sounds dated, it's not a slight on the album at all. It's almost become a victim of its own success that it's so heavily associated with the era, in the same way that I think Morning Glory sounds more dated than Definitely Maybe. It was not about your post directly  It is common to some people to say that Pepper is overrated and that it sounds very tad. I do agree with the fact that Revolver is a fresher and maybe a better album. Tomorrow Never Knows still sounds amazing, Eleanor Rigby, She Said She Said. What songs on Morning Glory sounds more dated that Definitely Maybe, for you ?  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2015 18:02:14 GMT -5
Don't get me wrong, I love Pepper and most of the songs you mentioned are up there with The Beatles' best. And when I say it sounds dated, it's not a slight on the album at all. It's almost become a victim of its own success that it's so heavily associated with the era, in the same way that I think Morning Glory sounds more dated than Definitely Maybe. It was not about your post directly It is common to some people to say that Pepper is overrated and that it sounds very tad. I do agree with the fact that Revolver is a fresher and maybe a better album. Tomorrow Never Knows still sounds amazing, Eleanor Rigby, She Said She Said. What songs on Morning Glory sounds more dated that Definitely Maybe ? She's Electric is probably the main one but there are others like Roll With It that just scream Britpop and 90s to me. Again, I love the album but it seems to be more heavily associated with the 90s and the Britpop scene than Definitely Maybe, which I think has more of a timelessness quality about it. I'm sure some of you think I'm spouting absolutely shite, which is understandable. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2015 18:09:34 GMT -5
Honestly I feel all BEATLE LPS are very overrated , I think if the " the fab 4 " we're not attached to half the Lps they would long be forgotten ...but they are the BEATLES so they must be the best thing since sliced bread , right  Bravo keef for having the balls to say it |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2015 18:10:45 GMT -5
It was not about your post directly It is common to some people to say that Pepper is overrated and that it sounds very tad. I do agree with the fact that Revolver is a fresher and maybe a better album. Tomorrow Never Knows still sounds amazing, Eleanor Rigby, She Said She Said. What songs on Morning Glory sounds more dated that Definitely Maybe ? She's Electric is probably the main one but there are others like Roll With It that just scream Britpop and 90s to me. Again, I love the album but it seems to be more heavily associated with the 90s and the Britpop scene than Definitely Maybe, which I think has more of a timelessness quality about it. I'm sure some of you think I'm spouting absolutely shite, which is understandable. No, I do totally agree about your 2 songs choices, they were the ones I was thinking of (She's Electric for the tad one, and Roll With It for the exact sound of the era)  . Songs like Slide Away, Rock'n'Roll Star sound way fresher. However, Wonderwall always seems to sounds way more recent to my ears, if you compare to Roll With It or even 90% of the songs Oasis did at this time. |
|
|
|
Post by sortitout1471 on Aug 5, 2015 18:12:54 GMT -5
Honestly I feel all BEATLE LPS are very overrated , I think if the " the fab 4 " we're not attached to half the Lps they would long be forgotten ...but they are the BEATLES so they must be the best thing since sliced bread , right Bravo keef for having the balls to say it No offense but that is utter garbage. The Beatles had ridiculously good melodies in general. Ridiculously melodic. Doesn't matter whether some their songs were part jibberish or not. They were genuine geniuses. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2015 18:16:36 GMT -5
Honestly I feel all BEATLE LPS are very overrated , I think if the " the fab 4 " we're not attached to half the Lps they would long be forgotten ...but they are the BEATLES so they must be the best thing since sliced bread , right Bravo keef for having the balls to say it No offense but that is utter garbage. The Beatles had ridiculously good melodies in general. Ridiculously melodic. Doesn't matter whether some their songs were part jibberish or not. They were genuine geniuses. Sorry man ...no offence ..bi always found the beagles ridiculously overrated |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2015 18:22:22 GMT -5
abbey road > sgt. pepper
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Aug 5, 2015 18:35:28 GMT -5
Honestly I feel all BEATLE LPS are very overrated , I think if the " the fab 4 " we're not attached to half the Lps they would long be forgotten ...but they are the BEATLES so they must be the best thing since sliced bread , right Bravo keef for having the balls to say it I strongly disagree - they are melodically the greatest act of all time. No competition. When you get all generations singing their songs - young and old, then you know there is something special going on there. I've read of studies whereby small children - too young to express or comprehend vocab - show strong emotional reaction while being exposed to Beatles songs, primarily because the melodies are so powerful and it touches upon natural cognitive instincts more readily than other acts like The Stones, Led Zep, The Who from the same era. In fact, those bands have nowhere near the universal appeal of The Beatles because they can't carry a tune like The Beatles can. The greatest music will always cross language and cultural boundaries and penetrate the deepest recesses of the human mind to form a universal appeal. It's no surprise then that The Beatles are the highest selling musical act in history. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2015 18:42:41 GMT -5
Hmmm, though one... Abbey Road more timeless, yes, without a doubt. But, if you compare the level both albums, well it is not evident. I consider that Abbey Road has 4 great songs : Something, Here Comes The Sun, Come Together and Because (+the medley)pretty good songs (Oh Darling!, I Want You!) and shitty ones (Maxwel, hmm...) Pepper has strong highlights (A Day In The Life, Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds) some not too good songs (Good Morning, Good Morning; Lovely Rita)and some underrated gems (She's Leaving Home, Being for the Benefit of Mr Kite) Both are their qualities and are brilliant. Lille preference for the Pepper Anyway, White Album Forever  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2015 18:44:53 GMT -5
Hmmm, though one... Abbey Road more timeless, yes, without a doubt. But, if you compare the level both albums, well it is not evident. I consider that Abbey Road has 4 great songs : Something, Here Comes The Sun, Come Together and Because (+the medley)pretty good songs (Oh Darling!, I Want You!) and shitty ones (Maxwel, hmm...) Pepper has strong highlights (A Day In The Life, Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds) some not too good songs (Good Morning, Good Morning; Lovely Rita)and some underrated gems (She's Leaving Home, Being for the Benefit of Mr Kite) Both are their qualities and are brilliant. Little preference for the Pepper, I love that fucking trip  ... Anyway, White Album Forever |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2015 18:47:46 GMT -5
Honestly I feel all BEATLE LPS are very overrated , I think if the " the fab 4 " we're not attached to half the Lps they would long be forgotten ...but they are the BEATLES so they must be the best thing since sliced bread , right Bravo keef for having the balls to say it I strongly disagree - they are melodically the greatest act of all time. No competition. When you get all generations singing their songs - young and old, then you know there is something special going on there. I've read of studies whereby small children - too young to express or comprehend vocab - show strong emotional reaction while being exposed to Beatles songs, primarily because the melodies are so powerful and it touches upon natural cognitive instincts more readily than other acts like The Stones, Led Zep, The Who from the same era. In fact, those bands have nowhere near the universal appeal of The Beatles because they can't carry a tune like The Beatles can. The greatest music will always cross language and cultural boundaries and penetrate the deepest recesses of the human mind to form a universal appeal. It's no surprise then that The Beatles are the highest selling musical act in history. Your certainly in the majority my friend .......but I have always found them quite boring ...why I never got the oasis comparison "..oasis would blow them off a stage ...to me THATS Rock and |
|
|
|
Post by Headmaster on Aug 5, 2015 18:48:51 GMT -5
If Keith wants to comment about musical rubbish he need look no further than every single Rolling Stones album since 1974. Some Girls is an awesome album, Tatoo You is great and Black and Blue is underrated. I would say that they were crap after Tatoo You, but I guess that The Beatles would be shit if they carried on for more 20 years too, the thing is that The Stones didn't stop at the right time unlike The Beatles. |
|
Bravo keef for having the balls to say it 
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5