Re: Theory of Musical Relativity, Zep, Hendrix, Beatles

[Jeremy Mixer <mixer@xxxxxxxx>]

Shar-

Just some points in reply to your post, this is NOT an attempt to jump
down your throat as you probably think it is.

On Mon, 26 Nov 2001, Weiser wrote:

> The mainstream of Western pop culture was revolutionized by the First
> British Music Invasion beginning with the arrival of the Beatles in New
> York in February of 1964.

That is correct, and only goes to start to show the brif point I was
making.

> The Beatles were NEVER merely a teen idol phenomenon.
> They were the heralds of the cultural revolution of the '60's.

They weren't merely just that, but they WERE just that, especially in
their early days. They were nothing more then  a British pop band on their
early albums. I lvoe the Beatles, but their early stuff was semi-cheezy
pop, much like some of the early yardbirds material. You know, the stuff
that made Clapton want to leave the band? I like the music but I can't say
I blame him, and looking back I am glad he did or we might not be on this
list today!

> Beatles '65 (U.S. release) was the group's last attempt at any kind of a
> complete top forty pop excursion.
> With the release of Rubber Soul, the Beatles crossed over into
> expanding pop music into a new area of counterculture expression that had
> begun as early as the release of "Help."
>
> Their new thread of experimentation developed further with the release of
> "Revolver." Revolver broke new ground and with it the Beatles shed their
> more placid image and left their past behind.

Once again I was not saying anything contradicting what you say here.

>  If the Beatles had'nt helped pave the way with the First British Music
> Invasion, then the second and third waves of that phenomenon might have
> fallen on less fertile minds. The Animals, The Who and The Yardbirds might
> not have garnered as many enthusiasts if the Beatles had'nt broken ground
> first. And as we all know, those two waves opened the way for the third

I still agree here.

> Many of the current music industry factory teen idols now produced by media
> mogul companies are no more than clever, yet basically mediocre performers.
> Some people might simply write the music sucks but that's not any kind of
> an adequate description. Those mediocre overhyped "talents" are backed by
> hired musicians performing tunes the headliner didn't write. Why? because
> the teen idols can't play the musical instruments and they can't write
> music either. Maybe that's why what their products are eventually
> completely forgettable.

Once again I agree with this point.

> In direct and thankful contrast,
> the Beatles were genuine instrumental musicians of great original talent
> and charismatic and compelling singers. Their biggest problem playing live
> was that professional sound systems were woefully inadequate to counter the
> incessant audience screams that met their slightest gestures.

Yeah because they were a teenybopper band :)

The reason I write this note is because I am really perplexed as to why
you seemed to have written a long note trying to argue with me about my
comments. And that is fine, nothing like a good discussion or debate.
However, your entire post really seemed to parelell the point I was trying
to make in two paragraphs and that was basically this-

The Beatles were the 60's band that all the kids were into.

Now it is N Sync, Backstreet Boys, Britney, etc, all kinds of pure crap.
THAT is what the equivilent audience is buying today.

The record industry, television industry, and radio industry push this
crap onto the public and really, in a way, designate what will be popular
and what will not. It's very sad and very unfortunate that this is the
case but once again- I'll bring large corperate companies up- they are
responsible fopr the reason that the majority of music in the modern time
seems to horrible. BUT one thing you have to kleep in mind is that there
is a LOT of crap that comes out EVERY year and there always has been a lot
of crap that comes out. Only a small selection of what comes out lasts the
test of time. Some bands, like Led Zeppelin, seem to get MORE respect over
time then they did when they were actually in existence. And if there is
anything that gives me faith in music, it is that there still is a small
portion of music that comes out that people will still want to hear in ten
years. Brintey is not one of them thank God.

all the best,
Jeremy