John Lennon

[The Dutchman!]

Olmy, Gren

Saw My Bloody Valentine play in StKilda some time ago - they were pretty good - were hugely influential on brit bands at the time (eg: Swervedriver) and had one or two great albums.

Pixies were of course fantastic up until and including doolittle - everything after sucked ars. In my opinion the best thing about Fight Club is Where is my Mind on the closing credits as the buildings blow up one by one - David Fincher is obviously a big fan....

What about Pavement? They used to rock out live...

 

[jod23]

Olmy,
"Its all Too Much" is a great track glad you mentioned it. His other song on Yellow Submarine i also love, "Only a Northern Song" not so much the guitaring or the lyrics but the feel of the song. The song sounds totally wrong yet right.

"If your listening to this song you may think the chords are going wrong, but there not we just wrote it like that"

Great song.

I agree that some of Harrisons best work is on The White Album. Long Long Long, Gently Weep, Piggies, Savoy Truffle. All good tracks. Let it Be has one of my two favourite Harrison tracks "I Me Mine" the other being "Something" also "For you Blue" is a great song.

What do you think of his work on two of my favourite Beatles Albums "Revolver" and "Rubber Soul". Tracks like "If i Needed Someone" "Think For Yourself" "Love you To"
"Taxman" and "I Want to Tell You". Just great songs, its really a pity the Beatles broke up when they did cos Harrison was really getting into stride. With Himself John and Paul combining, they could have made some really amazing stuff.

 

[jod23]

Olmy - some of my fave bands right now would be Oasis, Powderfinger, Silverchair, Jebediah, Nirvana and Metallica. I know its a litte diverse from the Beatles Beach Boys Straits Doors and stuff i love that came out of the 60's but hey i gotta go with the times heh.

Not sure where your from so i dont know if you will know the bands i mentioned. If your not an aussie then i wouldnt expect you to know who Jebs, Powderfinger and the Chair are, but there awesome.

Anyway Cheers.

 

[The Dutchman!]

Jod you wrote:

"Dutch - how can you say such masterpeices like Yesterday, Long and Winding Road and Hey Jude were corny. There musical gifts!!!
Others you mentioned such as Maxwell Silverhammer and Rocky Raccoon were brilliant cos it was something different. I know he have our own opinions im just very glad i dont have yours. Lol."

Actually I didn't say Long and Winding Road and Hey Jude were corny - just Yesterday... would have been nice if you'd brothered to read and respond to the whole post (given you asked me to compile it for you). As for my musical opinions, well pretty happy them thanks - and frankly I be worried if I like 95% of P.Mc's post 1967 musical output...

no offense, just hate being misquoted!

Olmy, pretty much on the same wave length as me - don't know anything about Augie March (sp?) - what are they like?

 

[jod23]

Dutch - ok read more carefully and i see that you still rate songs like Rocky Racoon and Maxwell Silver Hammer as being corny. There different not corny they were written to tell a story not to be a rock n roll hit. I think alot of ppl dont like this kind of Beatles music cos its not rated as normal beatles stuff. But this is the stuff i always thought put them apart from other bands, was there talent to write different and yet great tracks. Most bands just rehashed the same sound but the Beatles were always changing. I mean you go and put on the album Please Please Me and then listen to Sgt Peppers and its obvious that the Beatles never had a sound cos they were always changing.

Dont even get me started on Yesterday. How you can honestly say this song is corny whether you like it or not is just terrible.

"Yesterday all my troubles seemed so far away now it looks as though there here to stay oh i believe in yesterday. Why she had to go i dont know she wouldnt say I said something wrong now i long for Yesterday"

Its one of the greatest ballads of all time and you think its corny. You baffle me. And then you go on about Wings also being soft.
Now i know he wasnt exactly daring after the Beatles breakup and never wrote like he did when with the Beatles but still his career with Wings and then his solo career is brilliant.

Songs like Band on the Run ( which you have a dig at ) Let em In, Live and Let Die, Maybe Im Amazed, No more Lonely Nights, Beautiful Night. All great tunes.

And im glad you stopped there before you started to say things about Lennon. In no way was Lennons Double Fantasy album going that way Lennon was always on the edge. He didnt know what safe was. Ellaborate on your Lennon comments please again

Cheers

Hope that satisfyed you.

 

[jod23]

Olmy, Dutch, im waiting.

 

[Olmy]

Originally posted by jod23:


Im not saying you need to sell records to be great but it does help. I know you have your own opinion and that you think songs like "I am One" is a classic and good for you. But the argument im trying to say is that amongst the music Industry you'll find a large percentage think songs like Yesterday, Ticket to Ride, In My Life are classics which they are. Only Pumpkins fans think "i am One" is a classic.

On your comments concerning that the Beatles wouldnt have No 1 hits today is stupid. I think they would have No 1 hits today! Britney Spears, NSync, Backstreet Boys there all Pop songs. The Beatles were the kings of Pop. Please Please Me, Love Me Do, She Loves You, these are just the types of songs that would be No 1 hits today. I bet you a million dollars if The Backstreet Boys did a cover of She Loves You it would go No 1.

While My Guitar Gently Weeps - i had this argument with someone else on this topic. Yes Clapton played it but Harrison wrote it!
You think that he worte the music but couldnt play it hahah c'mon of course he could play it. George and Clapton were great friends at the time and he asked him to come in and play on a track. Just cos he gets a mate to play it doesnt mean he cant play it.

Now back to Corgan. I own Siamese Dream and Infinite Sadness so i do like the Pumpkins and i do listen to there stuff. The only song you mentioned that i thought was a stand out was "Cherub Rock". "I am One" "Tristessa" Siva" and the rest are just good rock tunes hardly classics. Now im not degrading Corgan, as far as the last ten or so years i would put him up in the top 5 but of all time his work pales in comparison to the guitarist ive mentioned.

Hmm. There ARE tonnes of people in the music industry who think that the Pumpkins are a classic act - it just depends on who you read, and which circles you're coming from.

Jod23 - I seriously doubt that if any of the Beatles songs were released as originals (ie: never heard before) at this current time, that any of them would be hit songs on the top 40.

While it's true that the Beatles were pop for a while, they are an entirely different commodity to those crappy Britney's Sphears/N'Sunk/BackdoorBoys groups.

The Beatles were serious about their music (ie: they wrote most of their own songs, even from very early on). Today's chart-toppers (of those previously mentioned), aren't.

Anyway, it's really a matter of SPECULATION as to whether or not the Beatles would be chart-toppers as contemporaries in today's music climate. You say yes, I say no (to quote the band themselves!!!). There would be a fair few people who would agree with me though.

Similarly, it is also a matter of SPECULATION as to whether or not Harrison could have pulled the solo on While My Guitar Gently Weeps.

Hey, he probably could have done 'a solo' for the song - but considering that the solo is distinctively Claptonesque, you'd have to say that Harrison would have done it entirely different.

At any rate, you cannot rate him on something he didn't do. Whether he 'could have' or not is only a matter of speculation - not a hard and fast fact!

 

[Olmy]

Originally posted by jod23:


On the other songs you commented on, it seems to me that you think it has to be hard to play to be brilliant. That is ridiculous Harrisons little licks here and there were simple and not particularly hard to play for an accomplished guitarist but thats why they were so great. Simple yet beautiful. Thats what he was about. Unlike Knoffler who always has a huge solos in his songs the Beatles were never like that. There was never a Beatles song which would stop halfway through for George Harrison to have a huge two or three minute solo like Knoffler would.

On the Revolver album out of 14 tracks the longest song goes for 3.01 so theres no time for George to show off. The Bealtles were about the music that all four of them came together and created, it was never about solos and the spotlight. So if you think it has to be intricate, long and really hard to play to be good then your misguided.

I agree with you that Corgan and the Pumpkins did great things in the 90's and certainly did things differently which i like but Corgan as good as he is, is no Clapton Harrison Knoffler or Hendrix. Those four guys are actually known for being Lead Guitarists whereas Corgan is more noted as being the frontman of the Pumpkins.

Well . . . if you are defining someone as being 'great' you are playing with the assumption that great translates to the capability to do something amazing (or extremely well), or something that others cannot.

In this regard, if you are saying most of Harrison's efforts were simple (albeit very good and well done), then you are undermining the term 'great' in its very essence.

As far as I see it, Harrison was an extremely good lead guitarist for The Beatles, but in the overall spectre of lead guitarists, he efforts don't really make everyone else's pale in comparison, as you suggest.

I agree, it doesn't take some huge epic to make a great solo, but a "great solo" is distinguised from a "great soloist" (or great lead guitarist). There are heaps of good solos around, some are even just licks, as you mentioned. It's true, an average guitarist can pull off a great solo, but it takes many great solos and talent that others don't posses to make a "great soloist". Similarly, the ability to introduce something new, or combine different aspects to your own product also goes a long way to making someone 'great' (ie: lateral thinking etc. etc.). Well, that's what I define 'great' as being at least. (Otherwise you might as well say that every guitarist is great!).

There are a lot of guitarists, really, who you could call great - but most people, individually, only have a few - usually their favourites. It's the same for everyone! (You and I included).

However, once again, it all comes down to PERSONAL TASTE! I mean, if someone came up to me and said they couldn't stand The Beatles/Smashing Pumpkins, or any of their work, it wouldn't suddenly mean they had no idea in regards to music. Hell, that's just their opinion, which is defined by their taste.

There are tonnes of great musicians around who don't like or rate The Beatles (or any other band for that matter) for their own reasons. Yet, it doesn't stop them from being good musicians themselves.

That's one of the great things about music. It's free (ie: free for people to do what they want, and free for people to decide what they like out of a vast variety of different styles). I mean, what sounds good to us, might sound terrible to others - there is really no right or wrong about it!

So as to who is the better lead guitarist - well, once it is established that a guitarist has talent (which is also another grey area - matter for conjecture!), it is pretty much a personal decision/relationship made by the listener which defines whether a person likes a piece of music more than another. Clapton, Hendrix, Knopfler, Harrison are all good (or great if you like) guitarists, and I believe Corgan is too (along with countless others who you could also consider). But really, it's all about personal taste, isn't it? It's not a matter of 'everyone thinking the same', cos that's just not reality.

Personally, I don't see music as being a competition, at any rate. So therefore, while obviously, Corgan's style is one of my faves, it doesn't mean every other guitarist pales in comparison.

As for Billy Corgan not being a "recognised lead guitarist", well, I would dispute that one! Once again, it depends on what you read, who you talk to, and what circles you mix in.

 

[Magpie-Fletch]

Stuff John Lennon!

Johnny Rotten now there is a true icon of the 70's, a man who wasn't afraid to speak his mind, break some teeth and piss a shit load of people off in the process.

 

[Olmy]

Originally posted by jod23:

Im not saying you need to sell records to be great but it does help. I know you have your own opinion and that you think songs like "I am One" is a classic and good for you. But the argument im trying to say is that amongst the music Industry you'll find a large percentage think songs like Yesterday, Ticket to Ride, In My Life are classics which they are. Only Pumpkins fans think "i am One" is a classic.

Well, another thing there is, that I am one of those people who doesn't really care too much for certain sections of the music industry. (Face it, most music journo's are just out to get free tix to see as many bands as possible - anyway, they only write regarding their own PERSONAL opinion).

As I see it, "Gish", "Siamese Dream" and "Adore" are classic albums (I'm not saying they are any better than any others, but personally they are amongst my favourites).

You mightn't think so - which is fair enough. However, it doesn't suddenly make me wrong, does it?

I mean, isn't music something that we all relate to as individuals? If so, then considering people are so varied as individuals, isn't it also safe to say that people's tastes and prefences will also be varied? If so, then doesn't this allow for the fact that I might think Billy Corgan is a great guitarist, while you might disagree (but at least, hopefully, respect my opinion)?

Everyone's opinions are different. I think that's a good thing too, especially when it comes to something like music, where diversity sees that everyone is a winner.

Similarly, just because more people might agree that one guitarist is 'better' than another, it doesn't suddenly make those with a different opinion wrong either.

Where I'm coming from (ie: a guitarist of 8 years, and a listener of the bands I've mentioned earlier), my opinions will obviously differ from those of a different musical background.

 

[Bloodstained Angel]

NOW ya talking Magpie-Fletch !

I know who my Rock n Roll heros are - and Johnny is the king.

cheers

 

[Darky]

Still on guitarists, soloists etc... a good example of players not having to be brilliant is Dave Gilmour of Pink Floyd.

Now, he was technically such a lame guitarist that Roger Waters played a lot of his leads for him on the albums, but as Dave Mustaine (i.e. JESUS!!!!) of Megadeth once said "Dave Gilmour could say more with four notes than most guitarists could say with a million!"

------------------
Other bands play, Manowar KILL !!!!!!!!!

 

[kevin sooky]

Yes the Sex Pistols were so great that they are putting out a compilation album called The Sex Pistol's Greatest Hit.

Its 30 seconds of silence!

Johnny Rotten v. John Lennon - you've got to be kidding. Lennon 1420 Rotten -1

Rotten v. Tiny Tim, now that's a close call on who had the greater ability. I think Timmy gets in by a nose.

 

[Magpie-Fletch]

Your right, Kevin Sooky there is a difference between John Lennon and Johnny Rotten, one was a pansy-arse hippy who was out of touch with the real world.

While the other guy was a legitiment bad ass who ignored the critics and made the Sex Pistols a success despite radio, concert and shop-owner bans, plus once he was in the public eye he held firm behind his own opinion and beliefs and wasn't affraid to take a shot at anyone i.e Pink Floyd, the Queen, talk show hosts etc.

Also its incredibly ironic that a man who preached peace, love & understanding eventually met a violent end.

***Anarchy in the UK***

 

[^LadyBlue^]

Just wanted to wish ya all a very Merry Christmas - may the peace of the season be with you and may you always have a song in your hearts - no matter who it's by lol

 

[Carey_is_King]

I tried to read this thread, but it got so bloody intense. You people really take your "music" seriously don't you ? You talk like Lennon and his counterparts were important people who actually added something to mankind's existence, when they are nothing more than minstrels who make sounds for money.
They are irrelevant in the scheme of things.
Talking about drugged-up loons like Lennon as if they were the most important people of the 20th century....Jeez open your minds!

------------------
Trample the Weak,
Hurdle the Dead.

 

[jod23]

Olmy - Speculation that Harrison could've pulled off While My Guitar Gently Weeps. CMON he wrote it for god sake. He has to be able to play it. And im sure if i looked around i could find him doing it without Clapton. Clapton cant be there every tim ehe plays it can he?

I also think weve strayed off track. Corgan vs Harrison isnt just about solos its about the all round better guitarist. Theres a lot more to a lead guitar than just solos.
But anyways after reading your posts i agree with you. There is no points rating which tells you who the best guitarist in the world is. Jordan won championship after championship, Sampras was world No 1 so he was the best. But music isnt about that its about personal taste, you think Corgan is the best guitarist cos hes your favourite and i think Harrison is better cos hes my favourite.

When the truth is Knoffler beats them all hehe just kidding. It all comes down to personal taste, and in the end your personal taste is pretty good and mine is pretty damn good. Im glad you dont like Billy Ray Cyrus or something.

By the way comiserations (sp?) on the Pumpkins split.

Magpie_Fletch - you need help, and you have problems.

BSA - see magpie_fletch.

Kevin Sooky - you damn straight!!!!!

Carey is King - see magpie_fletch. John Lennon would rate easily as one of the most influential people ever, never mind just the last century. Making sound for money is actually called music and if noone made music the world would be a very boring place! Lennon with the other three happened to make prolly the best sound for money as you call it ever so show a little respect. Stick to what you know Careyboy.

 

[Carey_is_King]

I was not commenting on their music. I am not a musician, so I am not qualified. I actually liked much of the Beatle's music, but to suggest that Lennon was in any way important in the 20th century is ludicrous. Churchill was important. Hitler was important. Dr Barnard was important....etc etc.
Get the picture ?


------------------
Trample the Weak,
Hurdle the Dead.

 

[jod23]

Careyisking - anything you say on these boards in the future will now come with a grain os salt. If your honestly that ignorant to realise that John Lennon and the other 3 members of the Beatles had a profound influence on the world. The Beatles changed a lot of things in this past century and will go down in history as the most influential and most important band ever. You the ignorant one careyboy if you cant see that.

 

[Carey_is_King]

It really is scary that you think four guys in a band actually change anything but their girlfriends and their drugs. You must be very young and obviously very naive.

------------------
Trample the Weak,
Hurdle the Dead.

 

[Carey_is_King]

I looked at your profile. Is that painter as in artiste ?

------------------
Trample the Weak,
Hurdle the Dead.

 

[Darky]

Jod how do you figure the Beatles had an influence on the world in any way other than influencing music?
Sure, Lennon and McCartney took up various causes but hey its easy for them to write and sing about how screwed the world is (and make money in the process) from their $20 million mansions!

------------------
Other bands play, Manowar KILL !!!!!!!!!

 

[jod23]

CIK - Painter as in manual labour. Im a tradesman. You have no idea what your talking about do you, to honestly believe that you think the Beatles didnt change the world is very ignorant. I hope you and DARKY go and hire out the Beatles Anthology video set and then you'll see how wrong you are.

 

[Darky]

Jod, thanks for the suggestion about the videos. If I find any documentaries about chronicling (is there such a word) the 20th century, I will let you know as you seem to have a problem grasping that there have been 30 years calendar years since 1970.

------------------
Other bands play, Manowar KILL !!!!!!!!!

 

[Carey_is_King]

Jod,

Nothing wrong with manual labour, it's good honest work.
As for the Beatles, let's get some perspective here. I lived through the Beatles era, and whilst I acknowledge their impact on music of the time, it was nothing more than pleasant pop music. They did all the things that pop bands do; they smoked anything they could get their hands on, popped pills, and screwed as often as possible. (None of this changed the world, by the way.)
Later on, the talents of McCartney and Lennon became more obvious, and they were clearly more than your average pop song writers. As I have said before, I am no musician, so I must trust in others to confirm that McCartney, in particular, is a brilliant musician, and Lennon was very good too.
All that having been said, writing songs about peace in rose coloured glasses, while you are high on a prohibited substance, does not change anything in the real world.
I invite you to be specific - tell us exactly how Lennon, in particular, changed the world.

------------------
Trample the Weak,
Hurdle the Dead.