# Billy Joel thinks Taylor Swift is the younger generation's (The) Beatles



## MusiquedeReve (Dec 31, 2021)

Quite a bold statement - what do you think?









Billy Joel thinks Taylor Swift is the younger generation’s Beatles


The Piano Man’s hot take got Twitter’s blood boiling.




nypost.com


----------



## ism (Dec 31, 2021)

I used to listen to Swift as a kind of guilty pleasure. But, although I haven't enjoyed all of her popy forays, I've come to see here as an artist who really deserved enormous respect. 

So yeah, maybe.


----------



## el-bo (Dec 31, 2021)

MorphineNoir said:


> Quite a bold statement - what do you think?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't think I know a single one of her songs, but still find that hard to believe. Not that it couldn't be true. But matching The Beatles' chameleon-like ability to feel like they could've risen to the top in any of the many genres/styles they dabbled with, is what sets them apart for me.


----------



## ism (Dec 31, 2021)

Well, not that Swift will ever be come remotely close to the Beatles for me, personally, she does constantly reinvent herself from country to pop to borderline hip-hop, and this year to folk-pop. All of which manage to hit a particular zeitgeist of a particular moment.

So for a younger generation growing up with this kind of evolution of self-expression ... I think there's argument that there's the a social function of the Beatles' chameleon-like qualities as a coming of age narrative that is at least plausibly seen in Swift.


----------



## Markrs (Dec 31, 2021)

I don't think you can compare anyone one person against a band with 3 of the greatest song writers in it. It would be fairer to compare against George Harrison, John Lenon or Paul McCartney individually.

The other big things is that the Beatles produced an album every 6 months, which is incredibly prolific and progression of their music over each 6 month period was crazy.

The Beatles also existed in a sort of Cambrian Explosion of popular music with band like The Who, The Rolling Stones, and The Kinks around then also producing stellar Albums every 6 - 12 months. I'm not sure that is the environment we have in popular music today.


----------



## el-bo (Dec 31, 2021)

ism said:


> Well, not that Swift will ever be come remotely close to the Beatles for me, personally, she does constantly reinvent herself from country to pop to borderline hip-hop, and this year to folk-pop. All of which manage to hit a particular zeitgeist of a particular moment.
> 
> So for a younger generation growing up with this kind of evolution of self-expression ... I think there's argument that there's the a social function of the Beatles chameleon like qualities as a coming of age narrative that is at least plausibly seen in Swift.


Fair enough. Hadn't realised she moved so easily between worlds. Perhaps I should listen to some of her stuff.


----------



## JonS (Dec 31, 2021)

MorphineNoir said:


> Quite a bold statement - what do you think?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Absolutely not. Taylor who? Can't remember one of her songs and she influenced no one. Time for Billy to retire, and I adore Billy Joel.


----------



## MartinH. (Dec 31, 2021)

Today no musician can be remotely as popular as The Beatles were, because music no longer has that value for people. Makes me think of this video:


----------



## ism (Dec 31, 2021)

el-bo said:


> Fair enough. Hadn't realised she moved so easily between worlds. Perhaps I should listen to some of her stuff.


Some of her mid period hyper-popy stuff feels very ... manufactured ... and I dislike it quite a lot actually.

But her teenage country music (moving towards country-pop) is adorable, and also quite hauntingly, innocently, beautiful. These are amazing songs for a 15 year old to write.

And if we forget all the deeply dubious teeny bopper princess marketing hype that accompanied this at the time, I think that it's by now perfectly clear that wasn't a fluke or a manufactured act, but a major, genuine, organic talent in songwriting emerging.

And then her two folk-pop albums of 2021, at least the tracks I've listened to, are also beautiful and very finely tuned for the lockdown zeitgeist of the past year.

In between, there's some really fun pop, endless 20-something breakup songs, evolving into excessively contemporary pop that looses me entirely.

But amid all the (*extremely*) tedious hype and internet and corporate nonsense, I really do think there's an artist here that deserves considerable respect in her own right.


----------



## RogiervG (Dec 31, 2021)

Here is another bold statement: Both Billy Joel and Taylor Swift are overrated 
Anyway.. back ontopic:
yes it's indeed a bold statement, and a weird one too.. considering... you know...


----------



## mallux (Dec 31, 2021)

I only discovered Taylor last year, having ignored her previous work as irrelevant to a 40-something male before... but Folklore and Evermore became the soundtrack to my daily lockdown walks... I think they are beautiful pieces of work, both musically and lyrically. There's something deceptively _uncomplicated_ to them that I think takes real effort/talent/experience to achieve.

I'm gradually discovering her early albums as she re-records them, and yes a lot of it is a bit too teenage-angst / pop filler for me... but to be honest I could happily live without 1962 "yeah yeah yeah" Beatles efforts as well


----------



## el-bo (Dec 31, 2021)

ism said:


> Some of her mid period hyper-popy stuff feels very ... manufactured ... and I dislike it quite a lot actually.
> 
> But her teenage country music (moving towards country-pop) is adorable, and also quite hauntingly, innocently, beautiful. These are amazing songs for a 15 year old to write.
> 
> ...


Well, fortunately I've not been subject to any of the hype and corporate nonsense. The only thing I know about her is she's re-recording her old albums to regain control...which I think is really cool.

Will definitely take your advice regarding the country stuff, but at this point in time I'm far more likely to be attracted to the pop stuff. Will check it out, at some point soon


----------



## fretwalker (Dec 31, 2021)

I think Taylor Swift is the younger generation's Billy Joel


----------



## el-bo (Dec 31, 2021)

mallux said:


> but to be honest I could happily live without 1962 "yeah yeah yeah" Beatles efforts as well


I do still like their earlier stuff. Much less pretense. But yeah...I think the Beatles material definitely needed to be better curated. Someone perhaps should've knocked the 'twee' out of McCartney, once upon a long ago


----------



## Stephen Limbaugh (Dec 31, 2021)

This thread reminds me of this meme from the Super Bowl a few years ago…


----------



## NekujaK (Dec 31, 2021)

I view any such comparisons to the Beatles, or to any other massively influential artists, as a sort of shorthand hyperbole to indicate praise and appreciation of talent.

There is no way a statement like that can be taken literally because the present social and musical landscape is so radically different than it was in 1964. But regardless of circumstances, it's always easy to use the past as a relatable measuring stick when trying to make a concise point. We all get what Billy was trying to say.

Anyway, I think Taylor Swift is an incredibly gifted songwriter who's demonstrated the ability to grow and evolve as artist, and has continued to reach new audiences, and she's done it on her own terms.


----------



## toddkreuz (Dec 31, 2021)

Taylor Swift has co written some good songs. Yay for her. She's no John Lennon. Did i really just have to say that?


----------



## SergeD (Dec 31, 2021)

Markrs said:


> The Beatles also existed in a sort of Cambrian Explosion


Absolutely, and even bigger, like the Jurassic period of modern music.

"She’s like that generation’s Beatles" he said, referring to that period instead of namely the Beatles.


----------



## dcoscina (Dec 31, 2021)

I’ll take Chris Cornell and Soundgarden thanks. Any day of the week.

I think Lady Ga Ga is very talented and smart. Bjork has also always garnered my admiration. I grew up with jazz in the household and never got into country… just not harmonically interesting enough.


----------



## b_elliott (Dec 31, 2021)

My experience: The Beatles were the thing in my generation. Then while in LA (80s) when I mentioned in passing Paul McCartney, a teen ager asked "Didn't he play with Wings?" Surprising to me as it was a first for me: no clue of the Beatles catalog. 

Fast fwd, 30 years another person/country had no idea who Phil Collins was. I mentioned he along with Elvis and MJ dominated male crooners. Not on this young person's radar. So more of a restricted-to-friend's-playlists in terms of music familiarity. 

A few years ago: I was curious about Taylor Swift so watched her do a live set (NPR?) with only an acoustic gtr and small audience. Great stage presence, in tune vocals and wrote decent songs. McCartney level? 

I'd enjoy watching Taylor with Paul compose a song together-- that would shed some light. I would not sell her short....


----------



## jbuhler (Dec 31, 2021)

el-bo said:


> I do still like their earlier stuff. Much less pretense. But yeah...I think the Beatles material definitely needed to be better curated. Someone perhaps should've knocked the 'twee' out of McCartney, once upon a long ago


There is no Beatles without the twee.


----------



## sostenuto (Dec 31, 2021)

Markrs said:


> I don't think you can compare anyone one person against a band with 3 of the greatest song writers in it. It would be fairer to compare against George Harrison, John Lenon or Paul McCartney individually.
> 
> The other big things is that the Beatles produced an album every 6 months, which is incredibly prolific and progression of their music over each 6 month period was crazy.
> 
> The Beatles also existed in a sort of Cambrian Explosion of popular music with band like The Who, The Rolling Stones, and The Kinks around then also producing stellar Albums every 6 - 12 months. I'm not sure that is the environment we have in popular music today.


But, poor Taylor Swift ! _ Beatles had* Ed Sullivan‍ ! 😮*_


----------



## el-bo (Dec 31, 2021)

sostenuto said:


> But, poor Taylor Swift ! _ Beatles had* Ed Sullivan‍ ! 😮*_


But Taylor gets Ed Sheeran


----------



## patrick76 (Dec 31, 2021)

mallux said:


> but Folklore and Evermore


I wonder though how much of that is Jack Antonoff.


----------



## mallux (Dec 31, 2021)

patrick76 said:


> I wonder though how much of that is Jack Antonoff.


A fair bit, if the Long Pond documentary is anything to go by. But still, I enjoyed the final product.


----------



## jbuhler (Dec 31, 2021)

patrick76 said:


> I wonder though how much of that is Jack Antonoff.


I'm all for emphasizing the collaborative nature of music production, but doing it by questioning the agency of female artists is really not the best way to do it.


----------



## JonS (Dec 31, 2021)

IMHO I adore the rock and pop music of the 60s, 70s and 80s but feel like so much of the music since is way too produced, not artist/band/songwriter driven and way too manufactured like an assembly plant so it lacks heart and authenticity. Everyone just wants fame and money and it shows in their insincere music.


----------



## mallux (Dec 31, 2021)

JonS said:


> IMHO I adore the rock and pop music of the 60s, 70s and 80s but feel like so much of the music since is way too produced, not artist/band/songwriter driven and way too manufactured like an assembly plant so it lacks heart and authenticity. Everyone just wants fame and money and it shows in their insincere music.


I don’t know where you’re going with this line of reasoning, but if minimally-produced songwriter-driven heart and authenticity is what you’re after, you could do a lot worse than Swift’s aforementioned last two albums.


----------



## ism (Dec 31, 2021)

Ryan Adams has an album that is a song-by-song reproduction of a Taylor Swift album. And it's one of her most slickest, most commercial, popy, stadium-touring albums with legions of adoring tween fans and marketing executives, recorded as adult alt-country, absent the hype and internet noise.


----------



## patrick76 (Dec 31, 2021)

jbuhler said:


> I'm all for emphasizing the collaborative nature of music production, but doing it by questioning the agency of female artists is really not the best way to do it.


Well it has nothing to do with her being a female. It has to do with me having some familiarity with Jack Antonoff and also Taylor’s previous work. I don’t appreciate the insinuation either.


----------



## ism (Dec 31, 2021)

patrick76 said:


> Well it has nothing to do with her being a female. It has to do with me having some familiarity with Jack Antonoff and also Taylor’s previous work. I don’t appreciate the insinuation either.


I don't think it's necessary to read this as insinuation, so much as a nudge that this is how this type of language is likely to read in the current environment.

For there's no question, that as an artist, Swift has been struggled for recognition - particularly as a 15 year old girl - in ways that a bunch of guitar playing teenage boys wouldn't have been. And then there was Kane West (I think?) publicly attacking her when she won .. whatever award that was that she one. Not that Beyonce isn't also great, and may even have deserved to have done, but would anyone other than a teenage girl be so publicly attacked?

So that the context. It's messy. Ryan Adams was also attacked as "mansplaining" for covering her records. Which I think was grossly unfair, for I think his tribute was quite the opposite - recognizing how her songwriting transcended the (at the time, very annoying) pop genre she was marketed in.

And as you say, she's very open about the nature and depth of the collaboration Jack Antonoff. Paul was better with John too. And vice versa. All of their solo stuff becomes a bit self absorbed eventually, for all that they (especially John) still had occasional moments of brilliance.


----------



## kgdrum (Dec 31, 2021)

Taylor Swift imo is a brilliant enormously talented songwriter/ performer. She has chameleon qualities and is unusually open minded musically and doesn’t seem to have a problem venturing into different genres. She’s a clever artist and appears adept with the business side of the music industry. 
It might be a generational thing but i can listen to a Taylor Swift song or YouTube video and marvel at the talent and craftsmanship of the song,her talent etc……….
But i never feel or remember any of it, I can’t tell you the name of any of her songs,albums or remember a melody,nothing. It almost feels like clever musical formula snack food. I like all kinds of music so I don’t think I’m biased but for me TS music is always well done but its like a cake with great icing but the cake is meh.
Enormously talented but no real substance “soul” from my perspective, again it might be a generational thing.


----------



## cuttime (Dec 31, 2021)

el-bo said:


> Someone perhaps should've knocked the 'twee' out of McCartney, once upon a long ago


That was John Lennon's job.


----------



## Jish (Dec 31, 2021)

dcoscina said:


> I grew up with jazz in the household and never got into country… just not harmonically interesting enough.


Yeah, the harmonic tendency of the genre always was a big reason I could never 'connect' more with that stuff, specifically- still, some lovely work out there, especially when the lines get blurred closer to several other genres, such as folk or even blues.

You know who wrote a pop-y country tune that is actually pretty damn good? Good ol' Stingster himself- he put this one together sometime and somewhere deep during the reign of Darth Brooks:


----------



## dcoscina (Dec 31, 2021)

I'm not comfortable with such liberal use of the word "brilliant". I reserve that for Bach, Beethoven, Stravinsky, Bartok, Charlie Parker, Coltrane... you know, those folks. I would say Lili Boulanger was brilliant considering she was bedridden for most of her short life but the complexity of her work is still jaw-dropping. 

But hey, it's just a word and it is more disposable to some than others.


----------



## kgdrum (Dec 31, 2021)

Country Music has changed over the years, If you hear some of the current bands play live they are incredible musicians and way more rock oriented than Country Music of previous generations. Live some of these bands are burning,tight as any groups in the music industry. I’m definitely not a Country Music enthusiast but i can appreciate great talent and performances.
Recently I bought Carrie Underwoods cd Cry Pretty 👍 
WOW! This is a beautiful album and the music performance and production are A+


----------



## sean8877 (Dec 31, 2021)

patrick76 said:


> I wonder though how much of that is Jack Antonoff.


That's the thing, the Beatles didn't need cowriters (except for themselves).


----------



## el-bo (Dec 31, 2021)

cuttime said:


> That was John Lennon's job.


And it might've worked-out had he not been so preoccupied with developing a sullen, dour disposition


----------



## Krayh (Dec 31, 2021)

So its official Billy has gone mentally ill…


----------



## kgdrum (Dec 31, 2021)

@Krayh 
Nothing new, I came up in the NY and have known many people connected with BJ since he was a member of the Hassels and his own bands.
There have been some tantalizing stories over decades………..


----------



## Dirtgrain (Dec 31, 2021)

How poetic are Swift's lyrics? I don't listen to her much (might have a song or two on a giant Spotify playlist). Right now, I can only recall "taking shots at me like like it's Patron." Of course, lyrics don't have to be great to make a great song, but I do know so many lines from The Beatles songs that come back to me now and then.

Then again, Bob Dylan and Simon and Garfunkel wrote lyrics maybe better than The Beatles.


----------



## JonS (Dec 31, 2021)

mallux said:


> I don’t know where you’re going with this line of reasoning, but if minimally-produced songwriter-driven heart and authenticity is what you’re after, you could do a lot worse than Swift’s aforementioned last two albums.


IMHO I greatly prefer live recordings and I just don't connect to most of the music that has come out for the last 30 years. I prefer when a band wrote their own music to a handful of songwriters trying to get any A-list performer to put their song on an album. So as much as I enjoy Max Martin and the Backstreet Boys, I would rather listen to a live Led Zeppelin or Pink Floyd recording any day. Feels like much of the last 3 decades of music is contrived and superficial to me with a lot of focus on over production to make up for the lack of authenticity.


----------



## Michel Simons (Dec 31, 2021)

el-bo said:


> But Taylor gets Ed Sheeran


She would probably be better off with Laura Sheeran.


----------



## el-bo (Dec 31, 2021)

Michel Simons said:


> She would probably be better off with Laura Sheeran.


Even Billy Sheehan


----------



## toomanynotes (Jan 1, 2022)

When I taught Kids/Teens guitar they would only connect with the bands of the old 60's,70's 80's 90's etc, never the present...says a lot really.


----------



## dcoscina (Jan 1, 2022)

I think we can agree Swift has that balance of talent, aesthetic appeal and star quality. There is a reason she is where she is. Not to diminish her achievements-
But as I mentioned before, brilliant or genius are terms reserved for a select few. I’m personally not into her music but I’ll give credit where credit is due.


----------



## Dirtgrain (Jan 1, 2022)

All you Swift haters: You need to calm down.


----------



## JonS (Jan 1, 2022)

Dirtgrain said:


> All you Swift haters: You need to calm down.


I am not a Swift hater and I don't doubt she has talent, but I find her music forgettable and irrelevant. Taylor Swift is not in the league of The Beatles and never will be and I can name 500 bands more interesting and talented than Swift in a blink of an eye. I'd rather listen to Squeeze or The Ramones or The Kinks or Joe Jackson or Jimi Hendrix or Paul Simon or Sting or Oscar Peterson or a gazillion other acts than her. I'd much rather listen to early Britney Spears or Whitney Houston or Mariah Carey than Taylor Swift. Just because someone makes a lot of money or becomes famous and successful does not make them talented or original at all IMHO. There are plenty of amazing books, movies, music albums, artwork and theater that did not do well at all commercially but are amazing art (Melville's Moby Dick until 50 years after the author's death, Hoffa, Swimming with Sharks, Van Gogh paintings while he lived), and the opposite is true too as there are tons of artistic works that make a killing that are just boring or bad and got lucky ie. Jurassic World, Knives Out, and most screen-to-stage and jukebox Broadway musicals are complete junk, heartless, and big empty money grabs! I can't think of one Taylor Swift melody but I can remember 50 Beatles' songs.


----------



## ManicMiner (Jan 1, 2022)

Taylor Swift is very clever in terms of lyrics, knows how to write a good hook, but I would say her fans are vast majority young girls who have grown up with her. She writes about things that strongly connect with them.
Musically though, nothing ground-breaking or very unique. I find it odd that she's compared to the Beatles.


----------



## ism (Jan 1, 2022)

JonS said:


> I am not a Swift hater and I don't doubt she has talent, but I find her music forgettable and irrelevant. Taylor Swift is not in the league of The Beatles and never will be and I can name 500 bands more interesting and talented than Swift in a blink of an eye. I'd rather listen to Squeeze or The Ramones or The Kinks or Joe Jackson or Jimi Hendrix or Paul Simon or Sting or Oscar Peterson or a gazillion other acts than her. I'd much rather listen to early Britney Spears or Whitney Houston or Mariah Carey than Taylor Swift.



If you're not a Wwift hater then why write at such length why you think her talent should be dismissed in light of true talent like the band you (or I) happen to like? 

In any event the question is whether what she *means* to this generation is similar to what the Beatles *meant* to previous generations. Not whether us mostly middle age guys prefer the White Album (because of course we do).


I have a 12 year old niece who probably doesn't find "Happiness is a warm gun" isn't especially meaningful or relevant to her life, while "haters gonna hate hate hate hate hate" really, and I think quite deeply, is. 




ManicMiner said:


> Musically though, nothing ground-breaking or very unique. I find it odd that she's compared to the Beatles.



Similarly, while a lot of us in this particular community are going to appreciate quite acutely, for instance, the groundbreaking production techniques of the Beatles and collaborators like George Martin - is that really why they mean so much to so many people? 



ManicMiner said:


> but I would say her fans are vast majority young girls who have grown up with her. She writes about things that strongly connect with them.



I think this is debatable. But lets assume it's true - how it it different from the Beatles? And how is this disqualifying?


----------



## Dirtgrain (Jan 1, 2022)

Dirtgrain said:


> All you Swift haters: You need to calm down.


This was a horrible attempt at humor--nothing more, and surely a lot less.


----------



## Futchibon (Jan 1, 2022)

What's next? Coldplay are this generations Zeppelin? 



Dirtgrain said:


> How poetic are Swift's lyrics?


Ooh, look what you made me do
Look what you made me do
Look what you just made me do
Look what you just made me-


----------



## el-bo (Jan 1, 2022)

Futchibon said:


> What's next? Coldplay are this generations Zeppelin?
> 
> 
> Ooh, look what you made me do
> ...


I wanna hold your hand
I wanna hold your hand
I wanna hold your hand
I wanna hold your ha-aaaaaaaaannd!

She loves you yeah yeah yeah
She loves you yeah yeah yeah
She loves you yeah yeah yeah Yeeeeeeaaaaaaahhhhhhh!


----------



## Futchibon (Jan 1, 2022)

el-bo said:


> I wanna hold your hand
> I wanna hold your hand
> I wanna hold your hand
> I wanna hold your ha-aaaaaaaaannd!
> ...


You forgot 

we all live in a yellow submarine
yellow submarine
yellow submarine

You're right, they suck equally, my opinion of my parents' taste in music has taken a nosedive!



Dirtgrain said:


> This was a horrible attempt at humor--nothing more, and surely a lot less.


You just need to shake it off, you have too much style to let it harm your repuation and cause any bad blood.

But one thing is for sure, Dirtgrain: you and I are never, ever, EVER getting back together!


----------



## Dirtgrain (Jan 1, 2022)

> I'm fixing a hole where the rain gets in and stops my mind from wandering.





> Words are flowing out like endless rain into a paper cup
> They slither wildly as they slip away across the universe
> Pools of sorrow, waves of joy are drifting through my opened mind
> Possessing and caressing me





> Here come old flat-top, he come groovin' up slowly
> He got ju-ju eyeball, he one holy roller
> He got hair down to his knee
> Got to be a joker, he just do what he please





> Picture yourself in a boat on a river
> With tangerine trees and marmalade skies
> Somebody calls you, you answer quite slowly
> A girl with kaleidoscope eyes
> ...





> Maybe I’m amazed at the the way you pulled me out of time
> And hung me on a line.


Not on par with Bob Dylan, but still top tier lyrics.

What are Swift's best lyrics?

Sidenote: I now recall detesting a Swift song where she repeatedly enunciated a vowel: ee-ee-ee-ee-ee. Something like that. It was unforgiveable in my mind at the time--now, hmmmm.


----------



## MusiquedeReve (Jan 1, 2022)

Dirtgrain said:


> Not on par with Bob Dylan, but still top tier lyrics.
> 
> What are Swift's best lyrics?
> 
> Sidenote: I now recall detesting a Swift song where she repeatedly enunciated a vowel: ee-ee-ee-ee-ee. Something like that. It was unforgiveable in my mind at the time--now, hmmmm.







Also plenty of occult imagery - discuss


----------



## Dirtgrain (Jan 1, 2022)

Oy vey, she's done it in more than just one song. That was no the song that I meant. This is the one:



Edit: still listening to it. She just did it with -ing. "You're drowning -ing -ing -ing -ing -ing." That's five -ings in addition to the one in the word. Surely some universal law of lyric writing/song performing has been violated. Assemble the court.


----------



## MusiquedeReve (Jan 1, 2022)

This thread would not be complete without Piero Scaruffi's infamous "copypasta":

"The fact that so many books still name the Beatles as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. Jazz critics have long recognized that the greatest jazz musicians of all times are Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all times. Classical critics rank the highly controversial Beethoven over classical musicians who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Rock critics are still blinded by commercial success. The Beatles sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore they must have been the greatest. Jazz critics grow up listening to a lot of jazz music of the past, classical critics grow up listening to a lot of classical music of the past. Rock critics are often totally ignorant of the rock music of the past, they barely know the best sellers. No wonder they will think that the Beatles did anything worthy of being saved. In a sense, the Beatles are emblematic of the status of rock criticism as a whole: too much attention paid to commercial phenomena (be it grunge or U2) and too little to the merits of real musicians. If somebody composes the most divine music but no major label picks him up and sells him around the world, a lot of rock critics will ignore him. If a major label picks up a musician who is as stereotyped as can be but launches her or him worldwide, your average critic will waste rivers of ink on her or him. This is the sad status of rock criticism: rock critics are basically publicists working for major labels, distributors and record stores. They simply highlight what product the music business wants to make money from.

Hopefully, one not-too-distant day, there will be a clear demarcation between a great musician like Tim Buckley, who never sold much, and commercial products like the Beatles. At such a time, rock critics will study their rock history and understand which artists accomplished which musical feat, and which simply exploited it commercially.

Beatles' "Aryan" music removed any trace of black music from rock and roll. It replaced syncopated African rhythm with linear Western melody, and lusty negro attitudes with cute white-kid smiles.

Contemporary musicians never spoke highly of the Beatles, and for good reason. They could never figure out why the Beatles' songs should be regarded more highly than their own. They knew that the Beatles were simply lucky to become a folk phenomenon (thanks to "Beatlemania", which had nothing to do with their musical merits). That phenomenon kept alive interest in their (mediocre) musical endeavours to this day. Nothing else grants the Beatles more attention than, say, the Kinks or the Rolling Stones. There was nothing intrinsically better in the Beatles' music. Ray Davies of the Kinks was certainly a far better songwriter than Lennon & McCartney. The Stones were certainly much more skilled musicians than the 'Fab Four'. And Pete Townshend was a far more accomplished composer, capable of entire operas such as "Tommy" and "Quadrophenia"; not to mention the far greater British musicians who followed them in subsequent decades or the US musicians themselves who initially spearheaded what the Beatles merely later repackaged to the masses.

The Beatles sold a lot of records not because they were the greatest musicians but simply because their music was easy to sell to the masses: it had no difficult content, it had no technical innovations, it had no creative depth. They wrote a bunch of catchy 3-minute ditties and they were photogenic. If somebody had not invented "Beatlemania" in 1963, you would not have wasted five minutes of your time reading these pages about such a trivial band."


----------



## David Cuny (Jan 1, 2022)

Well, some context might be helpful here. Instead of putting words in Billy's mouth, how about looking at what he actually said:



> Asked for his opinion on current artists, [Billy Joel] told USA Today: “Adele is a phenomenal singer, kind of a [Barbra] Streisand throwback.
> 
> “Taylor [Swift] is also a very talented girl and she’s productive and keeps coming up with great concepts and songs and she’s huge. You have to give her high marks. She knows music and she knows how to write. *She’s like that generation’s Beatles.*”


Since he's been asked to compare _current artists_, people like Bob Dylan aren't even in the scope of his comment.

He didn't say Taylor Swift was "_as talented as The Beatles_", or her songs were "_as great as The Beatles_". He made a simile: Taylor Swift is "_*like *that generation's Beatles_".

He also _qualified _the simile by listing the criteria - "_talented_", "_productive_", "_great concepts and songs_", "_she's huge_" - he used in making the comparison.

Some of these are objectively true - she is certainly "_productive_" and "_huge_".

As for "_talented_" and "_great concepts and songs_", that's subjective.

But Billy Joel is likely to be in a better position to recognize those qualities in songs that either you or me, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt here.


----------



## MusiquedeReve (Jan 1, 2022)

David Cuny said:


> Well, some context might be helpful here. Instead of putting words in Billy's mouth, how about looking at what he actually said:
> 
> 
> Since he's been asked to compare _current artists_, people like Bob Dylan aren't even in the scope of his comment.
> ...


----------



## el-bo (Jan 2, 2022)

MorphineNoir said:


> This thread would not be complete without Piero Scaruffi's infamous "copypasta":
> 
> "The fact that so many books still name the Beatles as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. Jazz critics have long recognized that the greatest jazz musicians of all times are Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all times. Classical critics rank the highly controversial Beethoven over classical musicians who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Rock critics are still blinded by commercial success. The Beatles sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore they must have been the greatest. Jazz critics grow up listening to a lot of jazz music of the past, classical critics grow up listening to a lot of classical music of the past. Rock critics are often totally ignorant of the rock music of the past, they barely know the best sellers. No wonder they will think that the Beatles did anything worthy of being saved. In a sense, the Beatles are emblematic of the status of rock criticism as a whole: too much attention paid to commercial phenomena (be it grunge or U2) and too little to the merits of real musicians. If somebody composes the most divine music but no major label picks him up and sells him around the world, a lot of rock critics will ignore him. If a major label picks up a musician who is as stereotyped as can be but launches her or him worldwide, your average critic will waste rivers of ink on her or him. This is the sad status of rock criticism: rock critics are basically publicists working for major labels, distributors and record stores. They simply highlight what product the music business wants to make money from.
> 
> ...


So much shit written within those paragraphs. FML!


----------



## GtrString (Jan 2, 2022)

When I hear the early Beatles (the touring band), it sounds like very simple, naive and repetitive pop songs for tweens. Basicly close to doo-wop and similar to what K-Pop is doing today. Later Beatles wrote more adult songs, and became culturally relevant for the 69 generation. They grew along with their audience at the time. A time capsule for sure.

Taylor Swift is from another time, and to me she seems more evolved, and not just in tune with the youth of today like the Beatles, but more honest and reflective in a smart and critical way. Something I never found in the Beatles, maybe due to the times and the drug culture of the 60s.

I would take a Taylor Swift song any day over the Beatles, tbh.


----------



## toomanynotes (Jan 2, 2022)

MorphineNoir said:


> This thread would not be complete without Piero Scaruffi's infamous "copypasta":
> 
> boy he sounds butt hurt.


----------



## toomanynotes (Jan 2, 2022)

GtrString said:


> When I hear the early Beatles (the touring band), it sounds like very simple, naive and repetitive pop songs for tweens. Basicly close to doo-wop and similar to what K-Pop is doing today. Later Beatles wrote more adult songs, and became culturally relevant for the 69 generation. They grew along with their audience at the time. A time capsule for sure.
> 
> Taylor Swift is from another time, and to me she seems more evolved, and not just in tune with the youth of today like the Beatles, but more honest and reflective in a smart and critical way. Something I never found in the Beatles, maybe due to the times and the drug culture of the 60s.
> 
> I would take a Taylor Swift song any day over the Beatles, tbh.


Lyrics are for losers, Music is for closers. I’ve never paid attention to lyrics.


----------



## dcoscina (Jan 2, 2022)

toomanynotes said:


> Lyrics are for losers, Music is for closers. I’ve never paid attention to lyrics.


I’ve never been that into lyrics either- my ears always fixate on the music itself- harmony, melody, rhythm, arrangement. But I do think there are songwriters who are especially talented at crafting amazing lyrics.


----------



## toomanynotes (Jan 2, 2022)

dcoscina said:


> I’ve never been that into lyrics either- my ears always fixate on the music itself- harmony, melody, rhythm, arrangement. But I do think there are songwriters who are especially talented at crafting amazing lyrics.


Yeah agreed, very talented lyricists out there. I wish I could write too!
I do think I have a mild case of dyslexia which has never helped. Don’t know about what others think, however I love the musical construction behind lyrics -melody, rhythmic dictation etc. Mostly no love for words…but can listen to the Beatles 😉


----------



## CGR (Jan 2, 2022)




----------



## davidson (Jan 2, 2022)

Wait, didn't Max Martin write 90% of her hits?


----------



## re-peat (Jan 2, 2022)

Song lyrics don’t necessarily have to mean something, or touch on profound subjects or be poetically engaging. With some songwriters — and McCartney is, I believe, one of the best examples — lyrics are first and foremost _a part of the music_. McCartney focuses just as much, if not more, on the musical sound and the rhythm of the words as on whatever it is that these words happen to mean. He loves alliterations, internal rhymes, carefully chosen plosives at specific points in a phrase, very specific sequences of vowels for certain melodic intervals, … (Listen to some of his best songs again concentrating exclusively on _the sounds_ of the words, and you will, I hope, recognize it.) Give or take a few exceptions, McCartney writes lyrics as a musician, not as a poet.

That explains a lot of his seemingly silly phrases. But they work perfectly musically. Sure, he crossed the line into Saccharine Valley every now and again, but in his best songs, the sounds of the words are about as essential as the notes of the tune and/or the chord progressions.

And McCartney never had “a message” to convey. (Nearly all the Beatles’ “message” songs are Lennon’s or Harrison’s.) He simply had an incredible gift for a.o. innocent, amazing tunes which he worked into amazing songs and his lyrics, just like his phenomenal bass playing, are an integral part of that musical fabric. On the rare occasions that he felt he had to send out a message, the results were usually — from a strictly song quality point of view, that is — not among his strongest efforts.

His lyrics also suited his (exceptional) vocal delivery better than those of the many songs he covered throughout his career. He sang fabulously on some of the covers he (or The Beatles) did, but his absolute best singing can only be heard in his own songs. And the lyrics are an important part of the reason why that is so.

For all those reasons, I’m of the opinion that McCartney is actually a sensationally good lyric writer. Unbelievably clever, intuitive yet intelligently calculated, and always … gorgeously musical.

(Bowie had that same quality too. As did Frank Zappa.)

__


----------



## applegrovebard (Jan 2, 2022)

After reading this thread I've been checking out a couple of Taylor Swift's recent indie folk-pop efforts. I'll listen to a few more but so far I'm just hearing pretty bland folkpop-lite, generic voice and simple, repetitive melodies. Maybe the lyrics raise their quality- I'd need to see them in print... I can certainly acknowledge quality in contemporary female singer-songwriters: Joanna Newsom and Laura Marling often give me that in the presence of greatness shiver of strangeness...


----------



## Vik (Jan 2, 2022)

Beatles was a band that clearly (after the initial couple of albums) sounded different from almost everything else at that time. They changed popular music in many ways, experimented with several musical styles and created their own. I'm not close to knowing as much about Swift as I do about Beatles, so I wonder what exactly it is with Taylor Swift or her music that suggests parallels to Beatles. Of course there are original bands/artists known for creating their own style after Beatles, but if I should try to come up with someone* with some kind of semi-obscure parallels to Beatles, it wouldn't be her.

*Some of the music from Phoebe Bridges (eg. 'If we could make it through September'), Sia, Jean Michelle Jarre, Sufjan Stevens, Björk, Coldplay, U2, Duncan Sheik, Kate Bush, certainly Peter Gabriel, Prefab Sprout, Jonsi/Sigur Ros, Daniel Lanois, Sting/Police ('Fragile' could almost have been a Beatles song, and also 'Fields of Gold' – especially the very touching Eva Cassidy version), Dalbello, Tori Amos, Talk Talk, Lisa Gerrard, Transglobal Underground, Deep Forest, Massive Attack, Spain, Portishead, Sarah McLachlan, Thomas Dolby, Lamb, Brian Ferry/Roxy Music, The Blue Nile all have, IMO, more parallels to Beatles than what I've heard from Taylor Swift. I'm talking about the ability to achieve their own sound/'thing', of course, not number of sold albums or the ability to copy Beatles.


----------



## ed buller (Jan 2, 2022)

fretwalker said:


> I think Taylor Swift is the younger generation's Billy Joel


this !

e


----------



## ism (Jan 2, 2022)

Vik said:


> Of course there are original bands/artists known for creating their own style after Beatles, but if I should try to come up with someone* with some kind of semi-obscure parallels to Beatles, it wouldn't be her.


You seem to be looking for musical similarities. But the point, I think, is the cultural, emotional, hermeneutical similarities - what her music means to people, beyond innovation in chord progression and recording techniques. 



Vik said:


> They changed popular music in many ways, experimented with several musical styles and created their own.



Well yes, their influence is huge. But as artists, they're also deeply immersed in everything else that's happening, musically, at the time. And their influences are very broad. So, without taking anything away from them (quite the opposite, in fact), I think it's a mistake to credit them with single handedly changing the face popular music, rather than being an iconic popular face of broader, deeper, social and artistic changes of an immensely dynamic moment in history.


----------



## Vik (Jan 2, 2022)

ism said:


> I think it's a mistake to credit them with single handedly changing the face popular music


Agree (btw, I don't look for musical similarities – see my little list above): there were many others who also contributed to change popular music back then, like eg. Cohen, Eric Burdon, Procol Harum, Led Zeppelin, Moody Blues, James Brown, Janis Joplin, Doors, Pink Floyd, Zappa, Stones, The Band, CSN&Y (especially Neil Young and David Crosby), Jimi Hendrix, Canned Heat, Joni Mitchell, Stevie Wonder – and Ennio Morricone!

(besides: George Martin was maybe the most important 'Beatle' for a while).

I guess we all are particularly impressed by the artists we discovered at early age, but having said that, I believe there were more 'game changers' between 1964 and 1971 than in any other, equally short period in pop music.


----------



## re-peat (Jan 2, 2022)

I happen to suffer from a petty intolerance for badly spelled names of composers and musicians, *Vik*. Terribly sorry about that. But it’s _Procol Harum_, _The Moody Blues_ and _David Crosby_.

About the latter: I seriously doubt that any CSN&Y fan would ever single out Crosby as the group’s most important or influential member. Wonderful musician, no doubt about it, and a *great* singer, but the man was stoned out of his head during most of CSN&Y’s heyday (and long after that as well) and the three others often had to move mountains to get him to participate in the band’s activities. Next to Neil Young, Stephen Stills, is widely recognized as the band’s most remarkable talent.

As for José Feliciano: I really don’t see how he was influential the way, say, Hendrix has been. What’s Feliciano’s legacy? A few hits, yes, but mostly kitsch and muzak.

And I also think that Martin would have strongly objected to the compliment of being “the most important Beatle” at any time during the band’s existence. He surely knew his worth and had a proud ego — see his falling out with EMI, basically for lack of recognition — but he also admitted (in more than one interview) that, creatively, he wasn’t in the same league as either Lennon or McCartney.

__


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jan 2, 2022)

MorphineNoir said:


> This thread would not be complete without Piero Scaruffi's infamous "copypasta":
> 
> "The fact that so many books still name the Beatles as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. Jazz critics have long recognized that the greatest jazz musicians of all times are Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all times. Classical critics rank the highly controversial Beethoven over classical musicians who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Rock critics are still blinded by commercial success. The Beatles sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore they must have been the greatest. Jazz critics grow up listening to a lot of jazz music of the past, classical critics grow up listening to a lot of classical music of the past. Rock critics are often totally ignorant of the rock music of the past, they barely know the best sellers. No wonder they will think that the Beatles did anything worthy of being saved. In a sense, the Beatles are emblematic of the status of rock criticism as a whole: too much attention paid to commercial phenomena (be it grunge or U2) and too little to the merits of real musicians. If somebody composes the most divine music but no major label picks him up and sells him around the world, a lot of rock critics will ignore him. If a major label picks up a musician who is as stereotyped as can be but launches her or him worldwide, your average critic will waste rivers of ink on her or him. This is the sad status of rock criticism: rock critics are basically publicists working for major labels, distributors and record stores. They simply highlight what product the music business wants to make money from.
> 
> ...


That dude 100% deserves the 2022 Darwin Award.


----------



## el-bo (Jan 2, 2022)

ism said:


> hermeneutical


I don't have a dance to represent 'Best Word Of The Day!' But if I did, it'd likely look something like this:


----------



## Dirtgrain (Jan 2, 2022)

When an artist's music is turned into muzak, that is a signifying moment of greatness. I still recall that time I heard Metallica Muzak on an elevator.

I do believe there are liminal figures in art--not to be written off as social constructs--artists who redefined the limits, the expectations, the direction of music. The Beatles did that.

Regarding Piero Scaruffi's comments, as I read how he distinguishes jazz musicians from rock music, I recalled a guitar teacher, Johnny Lawrence, telling me how The Beatles' songs are great for jazz music. They have nice harmonic and melodic structures. I have at least one record where Joe Pass plays a song by The Beatles.


----------



## SergeD (Jan 2, 2022)

Vik said:


> Beatles was a band that clearly (after the initial couple of albums) sounded different from almost everything else at that time. They changed popular music in many ways


Well, everything sounded so different from everything at that time, the Beatles had no choice to scale up because they were constantly challenged by a plethora of very creative bands.

I don't think miss Swift' s discography will stand the test of time, like the great album "Jagged Little Pill" from Alanis Morrisset or Bjork and Joni Mitchell songs, which have an unique signature.


----------



## ManicMiner (Jan 2, 2022)

ism said:


> ManicMiner said:
> 
> 
> > but I would say her fans are vast majority young girls who have grown up with her. She writes about things that strongly connect with them.
> ...


I think Swift writes almost exclusively about relationship struggles from a female point of view (and she does it very well), but the Beatles with their more groundbreaking stuff were much more abstract - Lucy in the Sky, I am the Walrus, Penny Lane, Eleanor Rigby etc etc.- not necessarily lyrically that would ostensibly directly connect, but their arrangements, chords, melodies etc. were fascinating.

Swift in terms of lyrics and production is excellent (Max Martin is about the best there is at turning anything into a best seller). But I would venture that her arrangements, melodies etc. are pretty pop standard.


----------



## Vik (Jan 2, 2022)

Moddy blues sf


re-peat said:


> happen to suffer from a petty intolerance for badly spelled names of composers and musicians, *Vik*. Terribly sorry about that. But it’s _Procol Harum_, _The Moody Blues_ and _David Crosby_.
> 
> About the latter: I seriously doubt that any CSN&Y fan would ever single out Crosby as the group’s most important or influential member. Wonderful musician, no doubt about it, and a *great* singer, but the man was stoned out of his head during most of CSN&Y’s heyday (and long after that as well) and the three others often had to move mountains to get him to participate in the band’s activities. Next to Neil Young, Stephen Stills, is widely recognized as the band’s most remarkable talent.
> 
> ...



@re-peat: Sorry about Feliciano, I totally mixed him up with someone else with a latin background, which in a way was very influential, but maybe not so much for having created his own style, but for making bossa music known worldwide together with Stan Getz: Juao Gileberto. The Getz/Gilberto album had a lot of impact when it was released. Re. Feliciano, I only remember him vaguely – from a couple of cover songs, so I don't know how he got in there (but I must admit liked his Doors-cover when I was a kid!)

David Crosby is someone I remember well, and I know that a lot if musicians listened to his If I Only Could Remember My Name. The only sworn CSNY fan I know who which listened a lot to CSNY back then (and probably still do) lists Crosby as one of his fav. albums ever, and I also found some of his solo stuff more interesting than the Stephen Stills' I have heard, but of course this isn't about him or me. Should I try to make a similar list again, I'd probably think of some other names.

Re. George Martin, there are lots of opinions about who deserved, if any, to be called the 5th Beatle– and I wont take part in that discussion. But thanks for the feedback! 









George Martin, Eric Clapton and other fifth members of the Beatles


They always got by with a little help from their friends.




www.nydailynews.com


----------



## JonS (Jan 2, 2022)

ism said:


> If you're not a Wwift hater then why write at such length why you think her talent should be dismissed in light of true talent like the band you (or I) happen to like?
> 
> In any event the question is whether what she *means* to this generation is similar to what the Beatles *meant* to previous generations. Not whether us mostly middle age guys prefer the White Album (because of course we do).
> 
> ...


I own a Taylor Swift album. I think she has talent, but I think there are so many more artists that I prefer to listen to and are way more talented. I think it's fine that others adore her talent or music or persona, I have no issue with her success at all, good for her. But musically, she is irrelevant to me IMHO. Her music is completely forgettable. As a person, I don't find anything she says on or off stage to mean anything or show wisdom or affect or impress me in any way. I am not a Swift hater at all, I have and will listen to her music here and there and enjoy it for what it is. But, in the history of music IMHO she is completely forgettable and unimportant.


----------



## el-bo (Jan 2, 2022)

JonS said:


> Her music is completely forgettable. As a person, I don't find anything she says on or off stage to mean anything or show wisdom or affect or impress me in any way.


Why don’t you tell us how you really feel


----------



## aeliron (Jan 2, 2022)

el-bo said:


> I wanna hold your hand
> I wanna hold your hand
> I wanna hold your hand
> I wanna hold your ha-aaaaaaaaannd!
> ...


yes but note how certain words are spelled differently in the last line


----------



## JonS (Jan 2, 2022)

el-bo said:


> Why don’t you tell us how you really feel



I’m shy ☺️🤫😉


----------



## JonS (Jan 2, 2022)

el-bo said:


> Why don’t you tell us how you really feel



Lol


----------



## creativeforge (Jan 12, 2022)

▼

ELEANOR RIGBY

Ah, look at all the lonely people
Ah, look at all the lonely people

Eleanor Rigby
Picks up the rice in the church where a wedding has been
Lives in a dream
Waits at the window
Wearing the face that she keeps in a jar by the door
Who is it for?

All the lonely people
Where do they all come from?
All the lonely people
Where do they all belong?

Father McKenzie
Writing the words of a sermon that no one will hear
No one comes near
Look at him working
Darning his socks in the night when there's nobody there
What does he care?

All the lonely people
Where do they all come from?
All the lonely people
Where do they all belong?

Ah, look at all the lonely people
Ah, look at all the lonely people

Eleanor Rigby
Died in the church and was buried along with her name
Nobody came
Father McKenzie
Wiping the dirt from his hands as he walks from the grave
No one was saved

All the lonely people (ah, look at all the lonely people)
Where do they all come from?
All the lonely people (ah, look at all the lonely people)
Where do they all belong?

© John Lennon, Paul McCartney


----------



## creativeforge (Jan 12, 2022)

▼
SHE'S LEAVING HOME

Wednesday morning at five o'clock
As the day begins
Silently closing her bedroom door
Leaving the note that she hoped would say more
She goes down the stairs to the kitchen
Clutching her handkerchief
Quietly turning the backdoor key
Stepping outside, she is free

She ... (we gave her most of our lives)
Is leaving (sacrificed most of our lives)
Home (we gave her everything money could buy)
She's leaving home, after living alone, for so many years

Father snores as his wife gets into her dressing gown
Picks up the letter that's lying there
Standing alone at the top of the stairs
She breaks down and cries to her husband
Daddy, our baby's gone.
Why would she treat us so thoughtlessly?
How could she do this to me?

She (we never thought of ourselves)
Is leaving (never a thought for ourselves)
Home (we struggled hard all our lives to get by)
She's leaving home, after living alone, for so many years

Friday morning, at nine o'clock
She is far away
Waiting to keep the appointment she made
Meeting a man from the Motor trade
She (what did we do that was wrong)
Is Having (we didn't know it was wrong)
Fun (fun is the one thing that money can't buy)

Something inside, that was always denied,
For so many years, 
She's leaving home.

© Lennon John Winston / Mccartney Paul James

QUOTE: “We’d seen a story in the newspaper about a young girl who’d left home and not been found,” McCartney recalled in the 1997 biography, _Many Years From Now._ “There were a lot of those at the time, and that was enough to give us a story line. So I started to get the lyrics – she slips out and leaves a note and then the parents wake up – It was rather poignant.” 

Lennon’s contributions were more personal, borrowing scornful lines from his stern Aunt Mimi, who had raised him as a child. “Paul had the basic theme, but all those lines like, ‘We sacrificed most of our lives, we gave her everything money could buy, never a thought for ourselves …’ those were the things Mimi used to say,” he told _Hit Parader_ in 1972. “It was easy to write.”









Meet the Runaway Who Inspired Beatles' 'She's Leaving Home'


Melanie Coe looks back on her teenage days as an unlikely Lennon/McCartney muse




www.rollingstone.com


----------



## Vik (Jan 12, 2022)

creativeforge said:


> ELEANOR RIGBY



And here's what they looked at


----------



## creativeforge (Jan 12, 2022)

Vik said:


> And here's what they looked at


I don't read music, I use guitar chords if I play with a band. But I saw a print out of my playing once at a Silent Piano (Yamaha) exhibit. I could never read and play the forest of black dots I saw on the pages.

I posted these two songs to address the "K-Pop" or teenbop labels assigned to them. Musicians always evolve (the good ones). And as they stopped touring, they started focusing on creating music *and lyrics* with more substance. How people reacted to their "new" music was quite something.

Paul and John could write stuff together that had depth of humanity. In the historical context, they wrote about life in their day. And well. Anyway. Just my take.

Peace.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jan 13, 2022)

fretwalker said:


> I think Taylor Swift is the younger generation's Billy Joel


This.

Btw, I think Billy Joel is an excellent musician, an amazing songwriter and a very good singer. I have a lot of respect for Taylor Swift and I enjoy her work, but to me the Beach Boys, The Beatles, Pink Floyd, Joni Mitchell and others broke rules and created new things in rock and pop music. I haven’t heard Billy or Taylor do those things.


----------



## Henrik B. Jensen (Jan 13, 2022)

Which bands / soloists are in fact not forgettable? Let's say since 1980.

I'm thinking Kraftwerk because of the influence they've had.
Some heavy metal band also, perhaps Judas Priest, Iron Maiden or Metallica.
Hip hop...dunno much about that.

Just going pretty much pr. genre anyway.


----------



## Michel Simons (Jan 13, 2022)

Henrik B. Jensen said:


> Which bands / soloists are in fact not forgettable? Let's say since 1980.
> 
> I'm thinking Kraftwerk because of the influence they've had.
> Some heavy metal band also, perhaps Judas Priest, Iron Maiden or Metallica.
> ...


Radiohead.


----------



## KEM (Jan 14, 2022)

I guess it’s plausible, I mean neither of them have made any good music so they have that in common, but I’ll give The Beatles some credit for being innovative for their time, Taylor Swift has done no such thing


----------



## KEM (Jan 14, 2022)

davidson said:


> Wait, didn't Max Martin write 90% of her hits?



Yes, he’s written basically every smash hit since the late 90s, Max Martin is a god level songwriter. This a common thread amongst Swedish musicians, Max Martin is the god of pop, Meshuggah are the gods of metal, Ludwig Göransson is the god of film scores, etc.


----------



## davidson (Jan 14, 2022)

KEM said:


> Yes, he’s written basically every smash hit since the late 90s, Max Martin is a god level songwriter. This a common thread amongst Swedish musicians, Max Martin is the god of pop, Meshuggah are the gods of metal, Ludwig Göransson is the god of film scores, etc.


Not forgetting Avicii was the god of dance music, and ABBA were the gods of pop groups. Impressive little country!


----------



## KEM (Jan 14, 2022)

davidson said:


> Not forgetting Avicii was the god of dance music, and ABBA were the gods of pop groups. Impressive little country!



You’re absolutely right about both!! Swedish contributions to music are undeniable


----------

