Only 100?

>>5226474
Except OP's picture is a joke.

typical retard.

>>5226502
>Thinks The Beatles are anything but a glorified boy band

Typical entry-level/casule music listener

>>5226523
>thinks Radiohead are nothing more than a generic alt rock band that made anything more than neonate like impact on music.

Typical hot topic shopping 12 year old

>#84

wait wat?

>>5226530
>Thinks a band with talent and an impact on music (Radiohead) has something to do with a band with no talent or impact on music (The Beatles)
>Thinks Hot Topics exist in Canada

Typical American.

>>5226546
>no impact on music (The Beatles)

troll harder, nigger

These arguments sound like The Tourist arguments, IE, retarded and full of shit.

>>5226551
I'm not a troll.

>>5226546
>The Beatles
>No impact on music

>>5226546

What?

The Beatles inspired GENERATIONS of musicians and influenced musical trends. They defined certain decades of music. Stop being so pretentious.

>>5226546
>typical delusional fanboy persists to revise history to make it seem that radiohead did anything for music so it'll increase his dangerously low self esteem.

Typical Canadian with his fundamentally low self esteem (Canadians realize that only a handful of them in their generation will turn out to be notable, so they are born with a low self esteem)

>>5226523
>>5226556
>>5226546
You are getting massively butthurt. Just sayin'

>>5226523
>casule

Really?

>English magazine
>not funny, trying too hard

Go figure!

>>5226563
>The Beatles inspired GENERATIONS of musicians and influenced musical trends.
The only thing The Beatles inspired was a hairstyle.

>They defined certain decades of music. Stop being so pretentious.
No they didn't, stop reading Rolling Stone.

>>5226564
>Doesn't realize his own country has a higher population than Canada, lowering his chance of becoming notable
Typical American.

>>5226571
Yes my butt is very hurt.

>>5226592

>implying people read your shitty post.

>>5226592
"No they didn't, stop reading Rolling Stone."

radiohead were on the cover of Rolling Stone twice

>>5226609
>Implying a few people including yourself haven't responded in this thread alone

>>5226622
The difference is Radiohead were on the cover when the magazine was actually good. Because they were in it.

>>5226592
>doesn't realize that the average american is more prone to be notable than average Canadian

>>5226627

In general I just see you're name and I just bash you. Face it, you're a fucking moron. The Beatles influenced tons of bands. If you don't like it have fun living in your dreamland.

>>5226657
>Doesn't realize that with a population ten times the size and a drastically lower average IQ that Americans can't be notable unless they are entertainers on MTV

Wow that list was suprisingly unfunny. If you're going to make something like this, at least make it funny....

>>5226665
You bash me? Oh nooo

My dreamland will suit me fine.

>>5226668
>thinking that the only notable americans are entertainers on MTV

Typical uncultured Canadian

>>5226685

I do because you're a moron. I want how you can sit there and say they haven't had a impact on music.

>>5226707
>Implying that even if that weren't true I would care about such an inferior country

>>5226710
>I want how you can sit there
?

>>5226722


Whoops, my bad.

*I want to know how you can sit there and say they haven't had an impact on modern music.

>>5226710
Because he's a troll, and you're feeding him.

I think the Beatles' influence on music ultimately led to the disaster that is modern mainstream music. Basic and catchy all went to hell when everyday people realized they could "do it" too.

But the influence is MOST CERTAINLY there. Today's popular music would be nothing like it is if they didn't exist, I would contend.

>>5226546

>No talent or impact on music (The Beatles)

Of course John screwed the band up, but comeon I had the most talent.

>>5226761
Stop posting.

>>5226758

Oh make no mistake I know what he is. It's just fun

>>5226743
Simple facts.

>>5226758
I'm not a troll.

>>5226763
>McCartney
>Talent

>>5226792
>implying you're not a troll

sitar rules fuck off nazi punk

>>5226813
>Implying I am

>>5226792

All I got out of this was that you have no clue what you're talking about.

>>5226722
>implying a country that's extraordinarily more inferior to America is anywhere close a lightyear's distacne in regards to importance.

Typical brainwashed canadian

>>5226761
>Basic and catchy

that's because you hever never listened to the beatles before.

>>5226832
The only thing The Beatles influenced (and it wasn't even direct, they're marketers were everything) were boy bands and entertainers like them, Jonas Brothers, Backstreet Boys, 50 Cent, N'Sync. They all take the same formula, no talent + great promoters = short career with no experimentation.

>>5226792

You wouldn't like me when I'm angry...

>>5226837
>Implying he has never seen the UN polls

>>5226855
You're right, they're even more basic than basic and they're not even catchy.

>>5226864
And what great promotion brought the Beatles to fame?

>>5226884
>implying that picture could in anyway refute my objective fact that i stated earlier.

lol. Typical canadian, failing miserably.

>>5226855
I'm quite familiar with their entire discography. I'm saying that some of their more dancy and simplistic songs were adopted by future bands and exaggerated heavily, eventually to the point of Basshunter and other shitty modern "musicians".

Let's be honest, popularity was independent from quality when it came to The Beatles.

>>5226864

If you read any interview with any sort of musical artist 9 times out of 10 the beatles influenced their music.

Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beatles%27_influence_on_popular_culture

>>5226909
Generic gimmicks like films, the fact they were an accessible pop band for an easily influenced pre-teen female audience, etc.

>>5226925
>Doesn't even know how to capitalize properly
Typical American with inferior curricula

>>5226957
>>5226523
>Doesn't know how to spell casual.
Typical Canadian with inferior curricula

>>5226957
>can't combat facts, have to pounce on irrelevant bullshit

hahahaha. typical canadian

>>5226948
>Wikipedia
And that article lists about 10 artists that covered their songs in the music section, and covers don't constitute influence.

>>5226981
>Implying casule isn't a word and is a typo for casual
Oh wow, pic related.

>>5226995
>Calls relevant, on-topic points "irrelevant bullshit"
Typical American who gets inspired by Fox News on how to debate

>>5227032

Made me chuckle how you ignored the first part of my post.

Also see: http://www.musicophile.com/index.php?itemid=98
http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/america_circa_60s/86384
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1568/is_2_33/ai_75099632/?tag=content;col1

itt incredibly butthurt beatles fans

>>5227086
>http://www.musicophile.com/index.php?itemid=98
>A bunch of typos
>It uses material from the Wikipedia
Looks credible.

>http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/america_circa_60s/86384
There's no influence stated there, did you even read these?

>http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1568/is_2_33/ai_75099632/?tag=content;col1
Seriously, these are all written by people on par with Amazon reviewers level of authority. You could have at least posted something professional from a magazine.

>>5227032
Except you used wikipedia to backup your argument for radiohead. Learn the concept of consistency. Typical retard.

>>5227032
>thinking capitalizing letters are 'on topic points'.

Typical retard.

>>5227162
You'll have to show me this argument since clearly it isn't in this thread.

>>5227145
Good point.

http://pitchfork.com/artists/546-the-beatles/

when we people learn to simply ignore the tourist?

goddamnit /mu/

>>5227145

Ah, you got me. I just ran a simple google search and then didn't read them at all. I'm to lazy to really care about an internet argument. You don't have to like their music but it did have an impact.

>>5227198
That's about as useful as
http://www.google.ca/search?&q=beatles

>>5227202
Because everyone secretly dreams that they will expose the gaping hole in The Tourists logic and tear him to shreds. Too bad he doesn't actually respond to any posts and just thrives on generalizations and throws ad hominem spitballs around.

>>5227222
no, it didnt.

>>5227280

Back that up please.

>>5227192
you screencap of OK computer. Typical retard, easily forgetting memorable, long-lasting topics that wree created only a day ago

>>5226462

I'm boycotting this POS magazine that doesn't recognize The Beatles' unquestionable greatness, who's with me?

Biased promotion made the Beatles.

This isn't the 60's. Everything they were acclaimed for then doesn't live up now. They inspire via biased promotion. They don't inspire new generations, some kid who hears "SHE LOVES YOU, YEAH YEAH YEAH" isn't "inspired." He just has to garner an appreciation for them... Cos..... They preach peace and love and shit... YEAH! You can't mock them, they are for peace and love!!

>>5227290
That was a "memorable, long-lasting topic" for you? You have pretty low standards, then again, you must since your country is so bad.

Oh and there's a huge difference, you see those numbers (1, 2, 3, etc., you should understand) and the brackets ( [ ] )? Those are citations. They're reputable sources on music, historians, musicologists, industry experts, etc. People who know real music, and don't praise boy bands like The Beatles who had no impact on music.

>>5227287
they had an impact(IGUESS), just not on anything worth a fuck.

>>5227352
Can you name some music historians who criticize The Beatles or downplay their significance? Not trolling, I'm legitimately interested. I've never seen it before.

>>5227391
Piero Scaruffi has written a pretty good essay:
http://www.scaruffi.com/vol1/beatles.html

His taste is pretty eclectic, some obviously forced but his two part essay is dead on.

>>5226458
> Old. I already read this on http://www.anantalk.com/ (anan = anon) last night.
I think I know you in real life, OP...

>>5227352


>implying the wikipedia article I posted didn't have citations.

Lol @ your double standards.

>>5227421
>Geocities
>Dead link
>Something not even about influence on Encyclopedia Britannica
>Some store promoting Magical Mystery Tour
>Dead link

etc.

>>5227352
Actually you didn't click the links.

All historians, music scholars, critics, music musicologists, etc. all cite the beatles as the most important, influential, revolutionary act in history.

And We have already proven how inferior Canada is to America. so no need to bother bringin America vs Canada in here again.

>>5226864

>The Beatles

>no experimentation

>>5227466
Actually I did, but clearly you didn't.

And if there's so many historians, etc. who praise The Beatles why are their texts so non-existent? Rolling Stone doesn't count here by the way, they seem to be your prime source.

And who is "we", and when did you prove something false? Facts are facts, you can't just flip them.

HERMAN'S HERMITS?

BETTER?

yeaaaah.

>>5227408
Except nobody takes Piero Scaruffi seriously. And he is not a music scholar at all. try again.

>>5227504
He's a published author who has written about music for decades before you were born. Clearly you know nothing about music.

this thread and about 99% of Beatles threads on /mu/ are bullshit
ESPECIALLY after these remasters

also, i know more about the beatles musically and historically then anyone in here, with the exception of another Beatles lover that extents beyond the music but knowing about the little fucking nuances in their personal and professional lives.

>>5227492
>Actually I did, but clearly you didn't
Actually you didn't. See now you're lying to impress your online friends on here.

>And if there's so many historians, etc. who praise The Beatles why are their texts so non-existent?

they're non-existent to you because you're fantastically uncultured and unusually incurious.

And I told you that Canada's significance is not anywhere close to a lightear away from America's. That's a fact.

The Beatles were an amazing pop rock boy band. They were the Backstreet Boys of their day. However, they were fortunate to have peaked at a time when there were only a limited number of T.V. stations, radio stations, few distribution channels, etc. They were huge because of the same reason everyone in America used to watch the Tonight Show. Johnny Carson was the best of 3 choices. Where else were you going to go for entertainment? Same thing with the Beatles. If you were somehow to swap the N'Sync or New Kids On The Block with the Beatles in time, we would all be wincing while listening to baby boomers ramble on about IMPORTANT N'Sync was and likewise suffering through ridiculous assertions that if you play "I Want It That Way" backward, you will hear satanic messages.

tl;dr. The Beatles. Whoop-a-dee-fuckin-doo.

>>5227521
And yet nobody takes him seriously. Clearly you know nothing about music if you think anybody with an IQ over 16 is takes him seriously. He's widely criticized for making baseless statements.

of course you in your typical Conservative fashion will latch on to it. More proof that you look to Sarah Palin for inspiration

>>5227408
That article was pretty disappointing. The tone was so deliberately inflammatory and it seems obvious the writer's being more exaggerated than necessary for attention's sake. It read like a Glenn Beck rant, full of attention-grabbing diciton and teeming with fallacious generalizations, not only about the Beatles, but about nearly every cultural reference he makes.

Sorry to look a gift horse in the mouth, but got any others? Thanks for the link regardless.

>>5227554
Scaruffi is just a guy with a lot of time on his hands running a website. The guy doesn't get published in any music magazines or papers so why should his reviews be considered professional? His writings are also clearly biased against popular music, regardless of how well researched they are. Music is not a science, you cannot approach it as one. The best critics approach their subjects from all angles, he only approaches it from one.

The problem I have with this Scaruffi fellow is that while it's one thing to say you don't like a band like the Beatles, it's quite another to say that they're unoriginal, musically insignificant, essentially a 60s boy band, etc. These are objective statements that simply fail with any real knowledge of musicology (http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/awp-notes_on.shtml)

>>5226462
None of those are actually reasons

>>5227534
>Actually you didn't. See now you're lying to impress your online friends on here.
Who?

>they're non-existent to you because you're fantastically uncultured and unusually incurious.
Then why don't you post one? Remember, no Rolling Stone.

>And I told you that Canada's significance is not anywhere close to a lightear away from America's. That's a fact.
We already proved otherwise, so clearly not.

>>5227551
Oh that's cute, I point out that you get inspiration from Fox News and you point out that I'm conservative, how original.

>>5227578
thatsthejoke.jpg

>>5227554
>It read like a Glenn Beck rant

Exactly. That's why I noted how Tourist and his Conservative leanings will readily latch on to it.

>>5227588
Am I supposed to know who Glenn Beck even is? You Americans are so insignificant it makes me burst out in laughter how I'm supposed to know your favourite politicians by name.

>>5227585
>Who?

fellow tripfags on here. It's blatantly evident that is this the case. denying this is futile.

>Then why don't you post one?
Look at that. inadvertently showing us that he has no clue what he's talking about when he actually needs reasons as to why the beatles were important. Absolutely pitiful.

>We already proved otherwise, so clearly not.
That's because you're the delusional canadian that does not like to accept facts.

Typical retarded canadian

>>5227611
look at that. Typical uncultured Canadian. not realizing that America is inarguably the most powerful, influential country on the planet.

Typical brainwashed Canadian

>>5227625
Holy butthurt, Batman!

>>5227541
Dude, you just blew my mind.

#60 is so true.

>>5227625
Calling him canadian really isn't helping your argument

>>5227625
>fellow tripfags on here. It's blatantly evident that is this the case. denying this is futile.
Well obviously it's futile against an American so typically narrow-minded.

>Look at that. inadvertently showing us that he has no clue what he's talking about when he actually needs reasons as to why the beatles were important. Absolutely pitiful.
Look at that, changing the subject when he can't post anything substantive.

>That's because you're the delusional canadian that does not like to accept facts.
>Canadian
Fixed that for you, and even if that was a fact, you can't deny a fact.

>>5227638
Pic related.

Why is it that Beatles threads always seem to "just pop up" when ever The Tourist is on? Coincidence? I think not.

>>5227611
Glenn Beck is not a politician, you goddamn retard.
Just because you're Canadian doesn't give you the right to be completely uneducated.
If you even watched the news, you would know who he is.

>>5227671

Iceland is fucking destroying everyone in that thing.

>>5227671
>Well obviously it's futile against an American so typically narrow-minded.
Obviously you'd think there's a possibility for you to refute this fact as you're stunted intelligence will not allow you to recall multiple times where it's been evident that you have no life at all.

>Look at that, changing the subject when he can't post anything substantive.
look at that. Still showing us that he is utterly unversed in music. >hurr durr i need links to show why they were important because i know nothing about musick!!!111!ONE!

>Fixed that for you, and even if that was a fact, you can't deny a fact.
never once have i alluded that i ever flirted with the idea of denying a fact.

Wait, what's going on amongst this tl;dr? Is someone seriously saying that if you don't totally lurve teh Beedluz then you're a stinking, uncultured, fat, conservatard American who's no better then Glen (Hitler) Beck?

Wow. Just wow.

>>5227706
Raoul, I don't know how it works in hick country over in the prairies but over here we don't pay attention to irrelevant news.

>>5227710
I never once said that America is perfect. Just that America have contributed more things to human civilization in the past 200 years than Canada has.

I'm constantly bashing America, and posted a troll topic on /b/ last night discussing how america isn't #1 atm.

This is the fake tourist right? He's never this much of a troll.

>>5227725
you clearly did not read one post in this topic.

Although you have no taste in music if you do not like the beatles, sure.

>>5227723
>Obviously you'd think there's a possibility for you to refute this fact as you're stunted intelligence will not allow you to recall multiple times where it's been evident that you have no life at all.
You sound unreasonably upset. May I remind you this is a simple music board.

>look at that. Still showing us that he is utterly unversed in music. >hurr durr i need links to show why they were important because i know nothing about musick!!!111!ONE!
You know you have to press enter before you put in another quote or it'll simply look like you talking.

>never once have i alluded that i ever flirted with the idea of denying a fact.
Typical American with inferior English comprehension. Can't even understand that it doesn't even matter who is denying the fact, but that it's futile.

>>5227727
Don't you live in Alberta?

HAHAHAAHAHAHAHA

>>5227746
Good for......you?

Somewhere, Hugo Chavez giggles.

>>5227774
He lives in Ontario, I'm pretty sure.

>>5227774
Ontario and Alberta, there's a difference.

what the shit's going on here