Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Do The Beatles still hold up to modern music?


cody78

Recommended Posts

41 minutes ago, cody78 said:

Hmmm, so the new Beatles song is out and it sounds ok. I imagine it will go to No.1, but I'm not so sure now with the way the charts have changed over latter years. Will it fit in with Miley Cyrus, Olivia Rodrigo, Billie Eilish and a load of rap/ grime stuff?  It'll be interesting to see how it does and it might also answer my original question in this thread alongside all the replies.

Who cares about chart position? The Music Industry is 100% different than it was even 20 years ago. Album sales mean absolutely nothing. Acts make money touring.

Edited by Sgt. Pepper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, cody78 said:

Hmmm, so the new Beatles song is out and it sounds ok. I imagine it will go to No.1, but I'm not so sure now with the way the charts have changed over latter years.  It'll be interesting to see how it does and it might also answer my original question in this thread alongside all the replies.

This release will have zero reflection of actual Beatles music "holding up".

1; Most of their fan base is now dead.

2; This is not actually new Beatles music, as much as Paul would like it to be.

3; (most) People don't buy music anymore, they rent it.

4; Music is generational, and that one has passed. There will always be some bleed over, but for the most part this is true.

Us survivors will enjoy it, perhaps get a slight tear and go about our day. Some will buy it, some won't. I surely won't. "Original" Beatles music will continue to be talked about, studied and critiqued for generations.

That alone answers your question.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cody78 said:

Hmmm, so the new Beatles song is out and it sounds ok. I imagine it will go to No.1, but I'm not so sure now with the way the charts have changed over latter years. Will it fit in with Miley Cyrus, Olivia Rodrigo, Billie Eilish and a load of rap/ grime stuff?  It'll be interesting to see how it does and it might also answer my original question in this thread alongside all the replies.

I think it will appeal to mainly Beatles fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Murph said:

This release will have zero reflection of actual Beatles music "holding up".

1; Most of their fan base is now dead.

2; This is not actually new Beatles music, as much as Paul would like it to be.

3; (most) People don't buy music anymore, they rent it.

4; Music is generational, and that one has passed. There will always be some bleed over, but for the most part this is true.

Us survivors will enjoy it, perhaps get a slight tear and go about our day. Some will buy it, some won't. I surely won't. "Original" Beatles music will continue to be talked about, studied and critiqued for generations.

That alone answers your question.

1. BS. Lots of people still listen to them. I'm one. My 24 year old son loves The Beatles. And of course that came from me.

2. I'll go along with that. It was written in '78 by John. Last I checked the Lads broke up in 1970. 

3. I still buy vinyl and CD's. I loath Spotify and the radio, and don't listen to them unless forced to.

4. The Beatles will surely always be relevant.  As of right now today they are 60 years on.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sgt. Pepper said:

1. BS. Lots of people still listen to them. I'm one. My 24 year old son loves The Beatles. And of course that came from me.

We know.

You do.

I didn't say people don't still listen to them. What I said was...

Most of their fan base is dead.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sgt. Pepper said:

3. I still buy vinyl and CD's. I loath Spotify and the radio, and don't listen to them unless forced to.

We know.

You do.

I didn't say people don't still buy cd's and vinyl. What I said was...

MOST PEOPLE don't buy music anymore, they rent it.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sgt. Pepper said:

4. The Beatles will surely always be relevant.  As of right now today they are 60 years on.

And what I  said was...

"Original" Beatles music will continue to be talked about, studied and critiqued for generations.

That alone answers your question.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Murph said:

We know.

You do.

I didn't say people don't still listen to them. What I said was...

Most of their fan base is dead.

Most of their fanbase is not dead. Everyone alive that listens to them is their fanbase. The ones that died obviously don't listen to them.

Same as we all know you have a J-15 and J-45 with RW back and sides.

Edited by Sgt. Pepper
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Sgt. Pepper said:

Who cares about chart position? The Music Industry is 100% different than it was even 20 years ago. Album sales mean absolutely nothing. Acts make money touring.

Well, true. The charts aren't/ weren't always a sign of good music. Tons of truly great music never charted. I hadn't looked at what was in the top 40 until recently when I thought I should try and keep up with what's happening now with them a bit. Just interested if the Beatles still get to No.1. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Murph said:

Beatles music will continue to be talked about, studied and critiqued for generations.

That alone answers your question.

That's true, but how much of the Beatles fame was due to a great marketing campaign, management and hype? This goes for a lot of bands that get huge. Obviously they had writing talent, but would they have ever been as big without the hype machine and media attention etc?  

Edited by cody78
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, cody78 said:

That's true, but how much of the Beatles fame was due to a great marketing campaign, management and hype? This goes for a lot of bands that get huge. Obviously they had writing talent, but would they have ever been as big without the hype machine and media attention etc?  

Or competition?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can’t find info for 2022 but in 2019 The Beatles company posted 50 million Pounds. I’d say they’re still relevant.

How much of any Bands fame is due to marketing & promotion? All of them. Without either, in some fashion, your unknowns..

Depending on what era were your Teenage years tends to be the music era you like best. Favorite Bands etc..

Everybody’s different.. What one person thinks is great somebody else thinks it sucks. Who’s right? Neither.

Some like, so called, deep esoteric lyrics, dark, shredding overdriven Guitars & a Drummer that plays a million beats a minute on a Drum set that has 100 Drums.. Others like a solo Singer/Guitarist.. Still others like Rap or Taylor Swift. Plus a million other combinations.. Who’s the best? None..

That said, there are some who stand the test of time.. The Beatles have been at it 60 plus years.. In modern music, that’s a significant record! Paul’s still playing to sold out Concerts all over the world.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Notes_Norton said:

Who's right? I say "Both"

                            >` B I N G O ´ <                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, E-minor7 said:

                            >` B I N G O ´ <                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      

Unfortunately it’s more than 2! It’s Billions….

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/3/2023 at 7:30 PM, cody78 said:

That's true, but how much of the Beatles fame was due to a great marketing campaign, management and hype? This goes for a lot of bands that get huge. Obviously they had writing talent, but would they have ever been as big without the hype machine and media attention etc?  

I wasn’t old enough to be around when the hype or mania was going on. I heard their music and loved it. What happened in the 60’s I did find out about till my teens. So that had no effect on ME.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sgt. Pepper said:

I wasn’t old enough to be around when the hype or mania was going on. I heard their music and loved it. What happened in the 60’s I did find out about till my teens. So that had no effect on ME.

I was there - but very young, , , still had and enjoyed the records. You probably won't be able to imagine how big they were.                                That means everywhere - also in the camps that didn't understand or like them. 

When Alfred himself joins the wave there not much left to discuss - says it all.  


Alfred Hitchcock does his best Ringo impression in a Beatles wig, 1964 : r/ beatles

                                             Don't know what he thought of the band, but he sure drummed the vibe up. . . 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been known to enjoy music from the 1800s to the 2020s. Depends on the piece of music, and how it affects me. And it doesn't matter what genre or artist. If I like it, I like it, if I don't, I ignore it.

But I listen with musician's ears. What the mass audiences go for might or might not agree with me. And that's OK.

My dad was into Tchaikovsky, Duke Ellington, Eddy Arnold, Frank Sinatra, Elton John and a lot more, so I guess I just inherited that.

 

Notes ♫

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Notes_Norton said:

I've been known to enjoy music from the 1800s to the 2020s. Depends on the piece of music, and how it affects me. And it doesn't matter what genre or artist. If I like it, I like it, if I don't, I ignore it.

But I listen with musician's ears. What the mass audiences go for might or might not agree with me. And that's OK.

My dad was into Tchaikovsky, Duke Ellington, Eddy Arnold, Frank Sinatra, Elton John and a lot more, so I guess I just inherited that.

 

Notes ♫

 

I would like to know how you as a sax-player (and perhaps colleagues) characterize The Beatles' relation to the saxophone.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...