Geoff Edgers of the Boston Globe made a documentary called Do It Again as sort of a fan love letter/desperate entreaty for the Kinks to reunite. The film made the rounds of indie film festivals and then disappeared. I wish there was a way to watch it online somehow.
If by “oblique” you mean “vapid lyrical nonsense” then yes - it is oblique.
So all of the Beatles fans keep saying superior songwriting, better songwriting yadda yadda yadda. None of them have offered anything by way of evidence.
I can’t speak to musicianship but I can speak to lyrics and the Kinks were vastly superior.
Clever word-play, a wider variety of subject matter, a braver selection of subject matter. These typify the Kinks.
Their character songs are outstanding and often poignant - I’ll give credit to the Beatles for Eleanor Rigby.
As for as influence goes I’ll say only this, I’ve never heard an argument made that The Beatles were the originators of any genre of music.
To me the Beatles are nothing more (or less) than the New Kids on the Block of their generation. Over-marketed pretty-boy teeny-bopper fodder who are only as famous as they are because they were right on the cusp of television’s ubiquity. They were commercialization before commercialization was cool.
YMMV of course.
How many subsequent artists list the New Kids on the Block as a major influence?
I don’t know, and if this were about NKOTB it might be relevant.
QFT!
“I can’t speak to musicianship”
But you do anyway.
If NKOTB aren’t relevant, then why did you bring them up? The fact is, that darned near everyone lists the Beatles as an influence, and that says something.
This is just silly. I mean, this is what you would say if you were trying to sound like a pretentious git.
Wow, but you don’t know musicianship? Okay then, good to know.
You are posting in such an over-the-top, absolutely-no-acknowledgement-of-the Beatles’-near-universal critical respect that it isn’t worth responding. And your statement about never hearing an argument about the Beatles originating a genre of music suggests you haven’t spent much time paying attention to them. Help and Rubber Soul are held up as the originators of PowerPop; Revolver and Sgt. Pepper as part of the start of Psychedelic Pop and Sgt. Peppers is generally acknowledged as the first big Rock Album as Grown up Artistic Statement. Heck, Village Green Preservation Society is the Kinks’ entry into a category innovated by the Beatles with Sgt. Pepper. Your comments are full of :smack: and :rolleyes:.
If you want to start off by saying “yes, I get that the Beatles are held up as the most popular and important band in the modern/Rock era, but here’s where I think the Kink’s are better,” you might have a chance.
Right now you just sound silly.
Ms. Boods - you are the resident Kinks Scholar, quite literally, here on the SDMB. You love, respect and critically review the Kinks - do you see any need to dismiss the freakin’ Beatles in any way close to this?
Silliness.
The Kinks did indeed invent garage rock, but the Beatles invented so much more. And far more of the things they did were innovations.
Some are subtle. The intro to “From Me to You,” for instance, was one of the first songs to start with a vocal opening without words. “Taxman” was the first to have studio chatter before a song. One of the songs on Sgt. Pepper is an early example of beatboxing. “Norwegian Wood” introduced the sitar to western popular music. They were one of the first groups to write their own songs. Sgt. Pepper was one of the first concept albums (and influenced the Kinks into doint it, too).
The Beatles always strived to something different with each song and they very rarely, if ever, repeated musical ideas. Just as contrast, take a note of the Kinks’ first two singles: “You Really Got Me” and “All Day and All of the Night.” Both are very much the same. Ray Davies was nowhere near as musically ambitious as the Beatles (it helped that they had three songwriters who had a friendly competition against each other).
Hundreds of musicians of the era point to the Beatles as a musical influence. Not many point to the Kinks.
The Kinks were certainly one of the big five of the British Invasion (I’d add the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, the Who, and the Animals, though the Dave Clark Five is close). But they weren’t the Beatles.
Nope. 
Thank you!
Hey - I have an idea. This isn’t you sneak-bragging; this is a fellow Doper asking you to share. Do you have any papers you could link us to? If you have already in other threads, could you point out those threads?
Where exactly? Seems to me that I commented on lyrics, image and marketing.
Nope, that’s what I’d say if I truly felt that way (and I’m not alone) and felt no need to fawn all over a band that I don’t like in order to pander.
Sgt. Peppers - Not the first concept album, not even close. As to “the first big rock album as grown up artistic statement” That’s so vague as to be meaningless. But it shouldn’t be hard for you to cite the claim (from something other than a Beatle’s fan site.)
Help - Sits pretty firmly in the teeny-fodder camp. And I find no mention of the Beatles in the, admittedly minimal, research I did on the history of powerpop for this response. Many other British bands, but no Beatles. So cite?
Psychedelic rock I will grant you. Pretty short-lived as a genre goes but you got me on that one.
The fact that a quintillion people like a particular thing doesn’t mean that I have to like it or soothe the sensibilities of those who do.
Are they commercial and critical darlings? Sure. So are lots of bands. The Beatles just occupy their revered place because of good timing and better marketing.
Mostly the music sounds to me not unlike many other bands of their era. I can’t comment on the music beyond that since I know nothing about music beyond how it sounds to me.
Lyrically they don’t rank in the 10 of their time.
Boy you really loaded that one didn’t you? And I thought that appeal to authority was a cardinal logical fallacy.
Regardless, I didn’t expect to be agreed with by anyone at all. I’m aware of the cult of the Beatles and how rabid its members are. I just happen not to be one of them.
Most of your examples are kind of gimmicky and I doubt accurate.
From Me to You - Da da da dum dum dum is an innovation? I’m pretty sure that others before them thought to hum or inject meaningless syllables for a few seconds before singing.
But my first thought is scat. My second is Irish Lullaby - Too-rah-loo-rah-loo-rah would be an early example. I’m sure given a bit of thought I could come up with others.
- Vocal percussion was nothing new at the time and Pink Floyd used it a couple of years before Paul McCartney did.
Cite? They wrote SOME of their own songs. But they were hardly unique or original in that.
Again, I can’t speak to the music in a technical sense but a lot of their early stuff sounds pretty generic and similar to me.
You’re right though that those two Kinks songs sound pretty much exactly alike. And they, arguably, gave birth to what later became heavy-metal. The rest of their catalogue is at least as varied as the Beatles.
Look y’all, I didn’t say they suck or they are the worst or anything of the sort. They were good for what they were but, to me, what they were was nothing special. They benefitted from time and place and then loyalty.
The music they made sounds pretty standard to me - again I can’t speak to the technicalities - and lyrically they were average at best.
You wanna love and revere them as the be all and end all? Be my guest. Just don’t expect me to.
Well, since you bring that up in this thread, the Kinks’ song “See My Friends” “is credited by Jonathan Bellman as the first Western rock song to integrate Indian raga sounds, being released four months before the Beatles’ ‘Norwegian Wood (This Bird Has Flown)’.”
Maybe “not many” compared to The Beatles, but there have been a significant number. See here, though I couldn’t tell you how many of the bands listed have actually come out and said directly that The Kinks influenced them.
You just said you can’t speak to musicianship and then said something about musicianship: That one band is better than another. Make up your mind. The greatest band doesn’t always have the greatest lyrics.
The “Beatles as boy band” thing has been knocked around here already a few times. It’s just supposed to be a jejune “provocation” from someone who just heard of music last week and boned up on youtube since then to get a POV.
You’re wrong about their importance for self penned popular music. They were pioneers, and geniuses. That’s so much more important than inventing power pop, or metal, but of critical importance to every rock fad or genre. The Beatles went beyond influence. They started the ball rolling for all of their lessers to make up your favorite genres that you could swan over.
BTW they don’t get mentioned in your power pop histories because it is an underlying assumption that goes without saying that they made the whole thing happen for any of the named parties.
BTW no band lasts 50 years at this level through a modern concept like “marketing”. This is a business school interpretation seen through a looking glass backwards, by someone who can’t hear. Has nada to do with what happened in the music or the industry of the time either.
Their success created the “market” for your pet bands and genres. It didn’t exist before. So it stands as a fact that they were not “marketed” well. It was being written and invented as it happened, powered by their talent and the affection of the world.
You need me to 'splain to you how Sgt Pepper blew the world away? Sorry, I didn’t realize you had a term paper due.
Anytime you want to dig into all of the studio and musical innovations the Beatles brought to Rock/popular music, it’s all there. Reversing tracks, tape-looping, flanging, use of variable speeds on vocals vs rhythm tracks, raising the level of the bass in the mix, etc you can find it.
But what you really need is a mind open to hearing it, which you clearly don’t have. Dismissing the Beatles as a boy band is foolish. Anything you might say about anything else falls flat.
Yeah, and those Beach Boys - they were pop twits, too, eh? :smack:
Again, where did I say anything about musicianship. And no, the greatest band doesn’t always have the greatest lyrics. But the Beatles are often lauded for their lyricism. It is one more area where they are overrated.
No, it is a statement of demonstrable fact. The only thing jejune is your using the word jejune.
Cite. You make many claims but bring little info.
This is why Newton is never mentioned in the context of gravity and Dylan never gets brought up when discussing the transition to electric versus acoustic right? What a ridiculous statement.
You really are a fan boy aren’t you? Musical acts were never marketed before the Beatles? Did any bands before the Beatles play instruments or did they originate that too?
Do you always resort to weak ad hominems when you have nothing substantive to say. You made claims and I refuted or asked you to substantiate. You didn’t so I can only assume you can’t.
Would that be them or their producers? How much of it had never been done before.
Right nothing like that matters because…the Beatles originated everything. Except for the things they didn’t.
Why do you feel so personally insulted by my not considering the Beatles sacrosanct? And who is talking about the Beach Boys? Are we just tossing out band names now? Jefferson Airplane, Mojo Nixon and Skid Roper, First Edition.
None of them are relevant but throwing out names is fun.
So far those on the side of the Beatles have basically said:
1)They must be the best because lots of people love them lots and lots
2)They innovated the hell out of a lot of stuff that can’t be substantiated, are easily disproven or were because of someone else.
3)They’re the Beatles…the Beatles!!!
Again, if you need me to cite how transformational Sgt Pepper was when it was released, then you are either in denial or have no clue. Do your own research - and if that is too ad hominem for you, sorry.
Hint: try Googling “How important is Sgt Pepper?”
:smack:
So again you fail to back up any claims you’ve made and you fall back on, “Yeah but lots of people really love this album man. Beatles!!!”
I mean really, there should be ample and easily locatable cites for what you claim (unless the claims are not factual) so please substantiate.
You made the claims it is up to you to support them.
The Kinks once saved Chuck Norris from alien shrew-dogs. If you can’t find evidence of this it is because it is so well known that it needn’t be mentioned anywhere.
Gee, that is kind of fun. I’m beginning to see the appeal.