Drake angers Beatles fans with 'egotistical' Abbey Road tattoo

Well apparently someone in the UK working for Yahoo Finance UK.
Toss in a few quotes from that human cesspool called Twitter, and viola!
A new SHF thread to either pile on the "offender", or to notify the hive that they're too cool to care anything about it....

 

With all the surrounding “controversy”, after this track “dropped”, it received 16,458 streaming hits from fanatical followers and curious onlookers alike...

It ironically became another #1 smash.
Just like that.

 

Classic SH Forums

 

Finger on the pulse as ever.

 

It's getting worse. Self parody just about visible in the rear view mirror as SHF speeds on to something beyond self parody.

 

That crew is just happy to still have a pulse more often than not.

 

Huullo...How Are Ya...

 

Exactly. Drake is the Nickelback of hip hop. I love that I'm painted as some old rockist boomer for disliking Drake. He's not a respected or critically acclaimed artist at all. He is a huge hitmaker but given I actually called out a boomer who bashes hip hop music earlier this very day, I consider it very insulting to lump me in because I think Drake is a hack who relies heavily on autotune and bastardizing things Kanye did first on 808 And Heartbreaks and ten times better may I interject.

Again, calling Drake the Nickelback of hip hop is pretty common around the internet. He's a pop star like Bieber closer than any reputable rapper. Kendrick has already released three albums we'll be listening to in thirty years. Drake is closer to pop rap.

 

As someone who traditionally is more of a rock guy, I caught the beginning of a festival set for Kendrick several years ago, not being very familiar with him, and found myself almost immediately locked in. Have not really checked out his albums, but that live set was fantastic and showed real talent.

Similarly I saw the beginning of a Drake festival set and it took all of 90 seconds for me to conclude that there was nothing for me there. Would up wondering over to see Deadmaus or Skrillix or some other electro act I don't really care about instead.

No background familiarity with their music was necessary to see a night and day difference between the artistic quality on display at those shows. Just my individual takeaway.

 

You are flogging a dead horse in here mate

 

Steve-O from Jackass

 

I'm a proud Torontonian but comparing this achievement with the Beatles is plain ridiculous and pointless. No denying Drakes talent and achievement but the present day Billboard charts are calculated in a totally different way.

If kids/people today had to go out to a store (or even digital download) and spend $7.98 a song like a single in 1964 (99¢ for a 45rpm in the sixties in today's money would be $7.98) ... that chart would look a whole lot different ... plus not every song by the Beatles was available "individually". The comparison should not be used ... but then again, it is mostly young people working at Billboard and no doubt would think a 45 is a handgun.

Kids listen to Drake almost exclusivly on Spotify, which in 99% of the cases is paid for by their helicopter parents. How many kids would be going to a store and paying $8.00 a song. Not many.

But right ... it is a big wow. Toronto De Grasse kid at the top of the world.

Just another thought. Everybody listens to Spotify or an equivalent which is basically a radio station you listen to but all your plays are calculated as a "sale". Imagine if all The Beatles songs played on the radio in the sixties were added to their "actual" physical sales figure like they do now ... well you get what I'm saying.

It's a whole new world out there in music land and the way they calculate success. But this really is a case of apples vs oranges and both of their amazing achievements should not be compared.

 

Now HE is an actual Beatles fan.

 

That’s right. Spotify’s free tier is factored into Billboard’s sales these days for some reason, and even if someone only plays 30 seconds of a song...it still counts as a “play”, and enough plays count as a sale. And YouTube streams are also counted...but who’s to say whether the person playing it for the audio or the video? And it’s still FREE.
It’s apples and oranges.

 

I'm a Beatles fan of the highest order ... and I think this is hilarious and not worth wasting a brain cell getting bent out of shape about. And I doubt the four of them who cut their teeth on off-beat irreverent Goon Show humor would feel dissed.

 

Yeah ... I am a Beatles fan, no doubt. But I'm not anti Drake either. But that's not what I'm getting at. This whole chart stuff is pointless ... kinda like me replying to this lol

 

Yes it’s apples to oranges. Spotify and other streaming services capture what people are actually listening to and how much, not what they are simply buying and possibly listening to once or twice. And streaming data is computer-generated, not based on verbal reports by record store owners.

 

And bots make those numbers unreliable

 

What is this “Drake” you speak of? Seriously tho.... as mentioned above, maybe it’ll spark some interest in younger people to look into the fabs or even other groups that this forum champions. What’s the worst that could happen? Maybe kids will start bands again and actually play instruments and write songs that have depth and meaning.

 

Old Beatle fan yells at Drake