Jump to content
Wilfrid

The Beatles

Recommended Posts

I guess I had to do the research myself. From Wikipedia:

 

The song has been covered by a range of artists including Groove Holmes, the Troggs, Charlie McCoy, and Psychic TV. John Bush argued "'Good Vibrations' was rarely reprised by other acts, even during the cover-happy '60s. Its fragmented style made it essentially cover-proof."[30] In 1976, a nearly identical cover version was released as a single by Todd Rundgren for his album Faithful... In 2012, Wilson Phillips released an entire album containing covers of songs by The Beach Boys and The Mamas & the Papas titled Dedicated.[130] It included a version of "Good Vibrations" with Carnie Wilson on lead vocals which was released as a single and charted at number 25 on the US Billboard A/C chart.

 

As for LSD, I forgot that Elton John did a good version. Flaming Lips also weighed in with one, marginally better than Shatner's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@taion - it's an argument about history, not science and people have been having this fight in the academe for years.

 

It seems really weird to drag in Galileo and Columbus, anyway. It's not like, if they hadn't existed, Jupiter would have ended up with a different number of large moons, or else the Americas would have been different.

 

Though at some level, isn't this all a fairly pointless question of convention unless you're on an award committee or something? I'd have a hard time caring if they renamed Columbus Day to Erikson Day, anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Real question: has anyone done a cover of "Good Vibrations". I think Wilf intimated so, but I can't find any.

 

I guess Sneak could make the same argument for "Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds". Oh wait-- William Shatner's version showed it was just a song.

They have, but I don't think that's the distinction. There are "songs" which haven't been covered much, "records" which have been covered a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taion, I agree, despite the crude philosophical realism :D.

 

Henry Ford is more to the point. It's not that his factory process was there to be discovered (like gravity); more that someone was going to figure it out at some point, especially if many people were already doing something very like it. Or the printing press, or fast food restaurants, or flushing toilets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, but

 

Were it not for Ford, perhaps the US auto industry would have been somewhere other than Detroit.

Were it not for Gutenberg, perhaps it would not have been Luther but someone else.

Were it not for Kroc, perhaps the predominant form of fast food would not have been that style of hamburger.

 

Or more proximately, consider how iOS differs from Android, or especially how they differed at first. We'd be using different phones if Apple were a bit later.

 

In which sense Ford, Gutenberg, Kroc, and Jobs in some sense have made more of a difference, perhaps. But the specific identity of whoever discovered the Galilean moons matters less, I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a few nuggets from andy re the beatles' influence and impact on motown:

 

1. Chamber pop. The Beatles did this as early as Rubber Soul. Motown started using things like harpsichord, flutes, and electric sitars after this.
2. A Bit of Liverpool. The Supremes recorded a whole record of British Invasion covers*.
3. Psychedelia. Listen to the opening of the supremes' "reflections."

 

 

* not just beatles songs but mostly beatles songs (the uk title of the album was with love (from us to you); they also regularly performed a cover of "eight days a week" on tv shows even though it was not on the album.

 

re songs to records he agrees that the process had begun before the beatles but notes that they were a major part of accelerating it as they were with the transition from singles to albums as the mode of delivery in pop music.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tracing the roots of this discussion is tedious, but if you head for December 8, 2016, you'll find me saying that the influence of The Beatles on Motown could be exaggerated. I'm sure they had some influence, and no doubt there were strong incentives for everyone to cover Beatles songs at the height of the aptly named "mania."

 

But I'm glad you said nuggets. Certainly Motown producers may have taken all their chamber/psychedelic pop ideas from Beatles records. I don't know. But they needn't have, because of course The Beatles were not the sole originators or sole sources for that style. As I mentioned earlier, Freak Out! actually preceded Sgt Pepper. And then, of course, there's Nuggets.

 

You know, I'm sure Zappa was fully cognizant of The Beatles, and who knows if he borrowed ideas from them? But the influence of The Beatles on Zappa could be exaggerated. It really could.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tracing the roots of this discussion is tedious, but if you head for December 8, 2016, you'll find me saying that the influence of The Beatles on Motown could be exaggerated. I'm sure they had some influence, and no doubt there were strong incentives for everyone to cover Beatles songs at the height of the aptly named "mania."

 

 

 

 

that was the supremes' third album, by the way: the previous one had peaked at #2 on the chart. i don't think they needed to cover the beatles to gain exposure/sales; certainly not in the u.s.

 

if you're able to struggle back to the brief elvis costello reference that started this branch of the endless argument you'll see that he says that the beatles' sonic adventurousness gave acts as disparate as motown and hendrix license. that's it. again, he doesn't say, and no one has said, that motown was in any way dependent on the beatles or that they adopted their ideas wholesale from the beatles, or that they were sitting around waiting for the beatles to show them the way. of course, the beatles borrowed from motown acts (those before them and those after them) too. that doesn't mean that the beatles didn't have any meaningful influence on motown artists or that they were just one of many things in the air at the time for motown artists/producers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

They were pretty much the first group to mess with the aural perspective of their recordings and have it be more than just a gimmick. Before the Beatles, you had guys in lab coats doing recording experiments in the Fifties, but you didn't have rockers deliberately putting things out of balance, like a quiet vocal in front of a loud track on "Strawberry Fields Forever." You can't exaggerate the license that this gave to everyone from Motown to Jimi Hendrix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

by the way, while i have no idea what zappa's interest in the beatles may or may not have been at the time, i should point out, apropos chamber pop, that freak out! came out half a year after rubber soul.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hellooooo everyone. I have no intention of wading back into this mess after a long absence. Except that Frank Zappa was mentioned. And I just want to add that we all should know quite well that Zappa both heard and thought about the Beatles because "We're Only In It For The Money" is an explicit Beatles tribute and parody on several levels. In its own way it proves the Beatles' cultural influence since a fringe figure like Zappa had to contend with their hegemony and meaning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you think the Nuggets stuff bands weren't all directly influenced by (indeed, imitating) The Beatles, you just weren't in America in the mid-'60s. (Oh wait.)

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...