Do Most Beatles Songs Sound "Dated"?

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Oatsdad, Apr 9, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits, Abbie & Mitzi: Best Dogs Ever Thread Starter

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    Yeah, I know - yet ANOTHER Beatles thread! :sigh:

    I bring this up due to a debate I'm having with a friend. She's 31 and thinks that the Beatles sound "dated" and "old". I said I think some of their stuff shows its age - mostly the production of the 1963 songs and some of the lesser psychedelic tunes - but that most of it sounds like it could've been recorded today.

    So what're some thoughts on this? I think lots of 60s acts sound dated - they still sound GOOD, but the recordings feel stuck in that era. I don't hear that with the Fabs - I think most of their stuff lacks the period feel to dog it.

    Am I delusional?
     
  2. Traxinet

    Traxinet Active Member

    Location:
    Los Angeles
    No, they don't.

    Surrealistic Pillow, the great album that it is, sounds dated.

    Songs from the 1966-1967 era are the closest to sounding like period pieces but they are timeless nonetheless.
     
  3. Michael

    Michael I LOVE WIDE S-T-E-R-E-O!

    ...not for one nanosecond...:D
     
  4. rpd

    rpd Senior Member

    Location:
    Nashville
    oatsdad, you are kidding, right????
     
  5. Maggie

    Maggie like a walking, talking art show

    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    Most Beatles recordings don't sound dated because they are still influential. As long as there are popular bands that sound like this it's hard to say they sound dated, although they do sound of their era.
     
  6. Vinylsoul 1965

    Vinylsoul 1965 Senior Member

  7. KeithH

    KeithH Success With Honor...then and now

    Location:
    Beaver Stadium
    Yes.
     
  8. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits, Abbie & Mitzi: Best Dogs Ever Thread Starter

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    I wish I were, but my friend really thinks the Beatles sound dated. She doesn't say they sound BAD but she thinks they sound "old". She can't provide specifics, and when I offered song titles, she said "I can't specifically name things that make them sound that way, but it's just the overall sound." :sigh:

    Ironically, she LOVES music of the late 80s/early 90s, which is arguably the most "dated" sounding era of the last 50 years!
     
  9. Vinylsoul 1965

    Vinylsoul 1965 Senior Member

    Recordings that are timeless never age...A LOT of pop music from the 80's SOUNDS very dated, but not the Fabs.
     
  10. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits, Abbie & Mitzi: Best Dogs Ever Thread Starter

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    You believe this because...?
     
  11. Vinylsoul 1965

    Vinylsoul 1965 Senior Member

    31 is pretty dated...lol...I mean young :)
     
  12. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits, Abbie & Mitzi: Best Dogs Ever Thread Starter

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    To be clear, to me "dated" doesn't mean "bad". I think most Motown recordings and Beach Boys recordings sound dated, but they still sound GOOD. They're just clearly part of their era and wouldn't sound nearly the same if done today.

    I think most Stones stuff through 1967 is pretty dated; the 1968-1972 run has aged much better.

    I really feel that most Beatles tunes would sound about the same today as they did 40 years ago.. As some have mentioned, they're so influential that there's no reason things would sound different...
     
  13. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits, Abbie & Mitzi: Best Dogs Ever Thread Starter

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    Yeah, she's DEFINITELY aging poorly! :laugh:
     
  14. Pinknik

    Pinknik Senior Member

    I think "dated" is just another way of saying it doesn't do much for you. None of the music I love sounds dated to me, even if I can tell when it was recorded by how it sounds. Ya dig? :)
     
  15. erniebert

    erniebert Shoe-string audiophile

    Location:
    Toronto area
    Yeah. This chick - Is she hot? How about a photo?
     
  16. Pinknik

    Pinknik Senior Member

    She looks pretty young, but she's just back dated.
     
    Jimbo62, Wes_in_va and bonus like this.
  17. Max F

    Max F Member

    Why do people here care so much whether or not young people like the Beatles! Its kindof funny.

    BTW, they do like the Beatles even now. They told me so.
     
  18. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits, Abbie & Mitzi: Best Dogs Ever Thread Starter

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    No comment about her looks - take that as you will. No photos - she'd kill me if she knew I posted a shot of her here!
     
  19. docwebb

    docwebb Forum Resident

    Yes, the Beatles were of their time and their music sounds dated. But that is a good thing. Their music does not sound like what is being put out now....it is SUPERIOR to what is being put out now.
     
  20. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits, Abbie & Mitzi: Best Dogs Ever Thread Starter

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    Oh, this isn't about me caring whether or not she likes them. Heck, I'm kinda happy she DOESN'T - Stephanie likes a few good acts like Springsteen and Madonna, but she mostly loves crap like New Kids, Debbie Gibson, Barry Manilow and Chrisopher Cross. :hurl: It's usually a bad thing when she DOES like an act - that must mean they suck!

    So this thread doesn't exist because my friend dislikes the Fabs. (Which she doesn't - she's lukewarm toward them.) It exists to discuss whether she had a point and the music DOES sound "dated".

    That's it. I don't here "dated" when I hear most Beatles, but I wanted to see if others DID hear their stuff...
     
  21. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits, Abbie & Mitzi: Best Dogs Ever Thread Starter

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    We're not discussing quality of composition - we're discussing whether or not the music sounds stuck in its era...
     
  22. Tuco

    Tuco Senior Member

    Location:
    Pacific NW, USA
    Does she have an opinion about Hendrix? If she says that he sounds dated, then her opinion goes in the terlet.
     
  23. KeithH

    KeithH Success With Honor...then and now

    Location:
    Beaver Stadium
    Simply because it does. It doesn't sound like music being written today. Period. My opinion, obviously.
     
  24. J. R.

    J. R. Cat Herder

    Location:
    Kansas City, MO
    No. Great music is never dated.
     
  25. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits, Abbie & Mitzi: Best Dogs Ever Thread Starter

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    To clarify, I'm thinking more of the SOUND/production than the songs.

    Though I think there are plenty of Beatley songs being made today. As someone else mentioned, the Fabs were so influential that it's hard NOT to hear them in modern pop/rock.

    I guess here's the question: if you heard something that sounded just like a Beatles recording, would you automatically think it was made 40 years ago? I don't think most would - I think the production holds up.

    Whereas if you heard pretty much anything that sounds like it was recorded in 1987, you'd stick it in that period immediately. Heck, I love me some 80s, but the production methods really date tons of that stuff.

    I just don't hear much in the Beatles' stuff that screams "SIXTIES!!!" to me. Even the psychedelic stuff has a timeless quality to it... :shrug:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine