Jump to content

Your Favorite Beatles Album  

94 members have voted

  1. 1. Which Beatles album is your favorite (not necessarily which you think is best) and why?

    • Please Please Me
      0
    • Meet the Beatles
      2
    • Hard Day's Night
      1
    • Beatles For Sale
      1
    • Help!
      3
    • Rubber Soul
      9
    • Revolver
      12
    • Magical Mystery Tour
      3
    • White Album
      15
    • Yellow Submarine
      2
    • Abbey Road
      37
    • Let it Be
      0
    • Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (out of order, but I somehow left it out)
      9


Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, section122 said:

 

When I was younger I had this idea that much like sports you couldn't like 2 bands that were similar.

 

I chose Stones over Beatles and Metallica over GnR as the 2 examples that stick out in my head.  My teenage years though I realized that was dumb and fell head over heels for the Beatles.  Yellow Submarine will always hold a special place due to experiments my friends and I held.  0:)

 

On topic though Abbey Road is my favorite and a go to whenever I need background music at work that will keep me motivated.  That and Neil Young's greatest hits (different thread though)

 

I think Pink Floyd fans would have trouble picking a favorite as well.  Floyd is my favorite band of all time (them and Rage against the Machine - doesn't have to make sense lol) and there are heated debates.  I don't care for Syd Barrett Floyd it is way to "out there".  There are many that don't consider Division Bell a true Floyd album even though for me it is in the discussion of favorite albums by them.  Then there is the incredible run of dark side of the moon, wish you were here, animals, and the wall.  There are GIlmour fans, Waters fans, Syd fans.  I can't even pick my favorite after sitting here and trying to lol.

 

Didnt say I don’t like the Beatles, just that I prefer The Who .

Posted (edited)

 

it has to say something about us to rave on about Animals all these years later....  ?

 

 

 

The Wall came out my first year of high school, didn't dig it like everyone else around me seemed to.

 

 

Edited by row_33
  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

so why can't i get more fans interested in Exile???

 

I was hooked the first time i heard it

Too many levels for the casual listener to take in. A lyric sheet would help for some too. :lol:

Posted
3 minutes ago, row_33 said:

Have you seen them live?

 

 

I'm just too young to have seen the division bell tour but I have caught Gilmour live.  I missed Waters last year and I'm still not over it lol.

 

Just now, Gugny said:

 

Floyd, for me is easy:  Wish You Were Here, with Dark Side as a semi-distant second.

 

I think Water-less Floyd is still Floyd.  But I, personally, don't like one Floyd album that doesn't have Waters on it.

 

Division Bell is such a good album to me.  What do you want from me and Keep Talking are 2 of my favorite songs.  I actually think Animals would be my pick.  If you've never heard it check out Les Claypool and Frog Brigade doing the Animals album.  It is fantastic.

 

 

Just now, joesixpack said:

 

Didnt say I don’t like the Beatles, just that I prefer The Who .

 

Oh I wasn't trying to say that just that when I was younger I didn't realize you could like 2 bands that made similar music.  Stones were my classic rock band.  I had hot rocks 64-71 on vinyl lol.  Might be the only album I ever had on vinyl given to me by my aunt so I could listen to "real music".  God Bless her!  

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
24 minutes ago, The Real Buffalo Joe said:

As much as I love The Beatles, this award goes to Buddy Holly. Buddy Holly did it from the start of his career, where the Beatles weren't given that freedom until after stardom. And even then was only because they got to a point where they could fart into a microphone, and sell 100 million records.

 

This may well be true, but I feel we need to differentiate 'band' from a solo artist in this instance.  It's for this same reason I have to eliminate any of the Hendrix lineups from our 'best band' discussions.  But your point is still well taken and has me reading and learning more about Buddy this morning.  

Posted
37 minutes ago, The Real Buffalo Joe said:

As much as I love The Beatles, this award goes to Buddy Holly. Buddy Holly did it from the start of his career, where the Beatles weren't given that freedom until after stardom. And even then was only because they got to a point where they could fart into a microphone, and sell 100 million records.

 

Buddy Holly was popular for like 45 minutes.  You're trolling and it's ruining an otherwise very cool thread.  Please cut the ****.  Thanks.

Posted
20 minutes ago, coloradobillsfan said:

 

This may well be true, but I feel we need to differentiate 'band' from a solo artist in this instance.  It's for this same reason I have to eliminate any of the Hendrix lineups from our 'best band' discussions.  But your point is still well taken and has me reading and learning more about Buddy this morning.  

 

Buddy and Jimi helped secure the Strat as the early death guitar

 

 

Posted
20 minutes ago, coloradobillsfan said:

 

This may well be true, but I feel we need to differentiate 'band' from a solo artist in this instance.  It's for this same reason I have to eliminate any of the Hendrix lineups from our 'best band' discussions.  But your point is still well taken and has me reading and learning more about Buddy this morning.  

 

Oh, I have to respectfully disagree, on this one.  The Jimi Hendrix Experience was stacked with talent.  Noel Redding and Mitch Mitchell were two of the best at their respective instruments.

 

I think even Who, Stones and Beatles fans would agree that those bands lacked all-around talent.

 

None of those bands had a top-tier guitarist.  Ringo was a "good," drummer, as was Watts.  Bill Wyman was a very good bassist, but not "one of the best."

 

They made their sounds together, which is what made them such awesome bands.  But the Experience (and the Band of Gypsies, for that matter), were not just Hendrix's backup musicians; they were masters at their crafts.

Posted
10 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

Oh, I have to respectfully disagree, on this one.  The Jimi Hendrix Experience was stacked with talent.  Noel Redding and Mitch Mitchell were two of the best at their respective instruments.

 

I think even Who, Stones and Beatles fans would agree that those bands lacked all-around talent.

 

None of those bands had a top-tier guitarist.  Ringo was a "good," drummer, as was Watts.  Bill Wyman was a very good bassist, but not "one of the best."

 

They made their sounds together, which is what made them such awesome bands.  But the Experience (and the Band of Gypsies, for that matter), were not just Hendrix's backup musicians; they were masters at their crafts.

 

 

as we have stated, 1965 to mid 1970s cannot be replaced, no matter how many autotuners and dance routines are inflicted on us...

 

 

  • Haha (+1) 2
Posted
26 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

Buddy Holly was popular for like 45 minutes.  You're trolling and it's ruining an otherwise very cool thread.  Please cut the ****.  Thanks.

Not trolling. Look it up. Buddy Holly got into arguments with studio execs on a regular basis. Refused to record songs he didn't want. Produced is own. Refused to play with a studio band. Not tearing down the Beatles for what they did, I'm just saying they weren't the first artists to do things their own way. And they didn't gain that right until after they were already stars. They'd admit to that. No **** to be cut.

Posted
10 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

 

as we have stated, 1965 to mid 1970s cannot be replaced, no matter how many autotuners and dance routines are inflicted on us...

 

 

Amen, will never be another decade of music like that... ever.

Posted

In Keith Richards' autobiography, he talked about a conversation he had with Paul about the whole Beatles/Stones debate. They essentially agreed that it boiled down to a preference over vocal work vs instrumental work. They agreed that the Stones had better musical chops as far as playing their instrument goes, and the Beatles had much better vocals, as all four of them, even Ringo, the weakest link of the band vocally, could probably still have been a decent lead singer somewhere. 

Posted
On 6/16/2018 at 10:42 AM, Johnny Hammersticks said:

Norwegian Wood and In My Life are two of my favorite Beatles tunes.  I could play Rubber Soul on repeat.  Maybe not the best, but my favorite.

 

^ This.  My favorite Beatles album and probably Top 5 on any given day.  Nearly perfect.

 

While not a radical departure from previous albums, the move in a new direction is noticeable. Up to that point they were all very confident songwriters but perhaps an added dose of maturity (and drugs?) pushed them to break out into new territory.  

Posted
48 minutes ago, Gugny said:

I think even Who, Stones and Beatles fans would agree that those bands lacked all-around talent.

 

Curious who in The Who would you consider to be the weak link in talent?

Posted
1 hour ago, Gugny said:

 

Oh, I have to respectfully disagree, on this one.  The Jimi Hendrix Experience was stacked with talent.  Noel Redding and Mitch Mitchell were two of the best at their respective instruments.

 

I think even Who, Stones and Beatles fans would agree that those bands lacked all-around talent.

 

None of those bands had a top-tier guitarist.  Ringo was a "good," drummer, as was Watts.  Bill Wyman was a very good bassist, but not "one of the best."

 

They made their sounds together, which is what made them such awesome bands.  But the Experience (and the Band of Gypsies, for that matter), were not just Hendrix's backup musicians; they were masters at their crafts.

I don't think there is a weak link in the Who... 3 crack musicians and a singer who played a little harmonica or tambourine. 

Posted
20 minutes ago, coloradobillsfan said:

 

Curious who in The Who would you consider to be the weak link in talent?

 

I wouldn't consider anyone weak.  But I don't think Pete Townsend is an elite guitarist by any stretch.

Posted
1 hour ago, Gugny said:

 

Oh, I have to respectfully disagree, on this one.  The Jimi Hendrix Experience was stacked with talent.  Noel Redding and Mitch Mitchell were two of the best at their respective instruments.

 

I think even Who, Stones and Beatles fans would agree that those bands lacked all-around talent.

 

None of those bands had a top-tier guitarist.  Ringo was a "good," drummer, as was Watts.  Bill Wyman was a very good bassist, but not "one of the best."

 

They made their sounds together, which is what made them such awesome bands.  But the Experience (and the Band of Gypsies, for that matter), were not just Hendrix's backup musicians; they were masters at their crafts.

 I will have to give Jimi the nod over Mick Taylor.

Posted

The White Album (especially disc 2) creeps me out because I associate it with Charles Manson.  I was 7 when all that happened.

 

Some years later, I had just bought Physical Graffiti and listened to it non-stop while reading Helter Skelter (the Vincent Bugliosi book about Manson).  Same reaction now.

Posted
6 minutes ago, JÂy RÛßeÒ said:

The White Album (especially disc 2) creeps me out because I associate it with Charles Manson.  I was 7 when all that happened.

 

Some years later, I had just bought Physical Graffiti and listened to it non-stop while reading Helter Skelter (the Vincent Bugliosi book about Manson).  Same reaction now.

The messed up thing is Helter Skelter is just a British term for a playground slide. 

×
×
  • Create New...