genx this

The Pixies are way more important than The Beatles. There I said it. Wanna fight?
Tags: , ,

41 Responses:

  1. ommadawn says:

    I worked with a dude who was of the old school "nothing since the beatles was worth a damn"... my favorite retort was "they were 20 years ahead of their time. That was 40 years ago. Get over it"

  2. stannate says:

    The Beatles - Were just a band.
    Led Zeppelin - Just a band.
    The Beach Boys - Just a band.
    The Sex Pistols - Just a band.
    The Clash - Just a band.
    Crass - Just a band.
    Minor Threat - Just a band.
    The Cure - Just a band.
    The Smiths - Just a band.
    Nirvana - Just a band.
    The Pixies - Just a band.
    Oasis - Just a band.
    Radiohead - Just a band.
    Bloc Party - Just a band.
    The Arctic Monkeys - Just a band.
    The next big thing - JUST A BAND.

  3. mackys says:

    The who and the which?

    Are you talking about bands from 20 years ago again, old timer?

  4. ctd says:

    The reason it's possible to say that without feeling embarrassed is that The Beatles's influence is so omnipresent as to be a substrate.

    Also, this:

  5. wealhtheow says:

    The hell with that. Kraftwerk is more important than either of them.

  6. ksilebo says:

    I never liked the Beatles anyway.

  7. drjon says:

    geny bother?

  8. tjic says:

    > Wanna fight?


    But that's entirely unrelated to your comment on the Pixies, who did, in fact, rock.

  9. moof says:

    wtf does it mean for a band to be 'important', anyway?

    • strspn says:

      One component is being bearable without the boredom of feeling like you are in a market managed by someone trying to make you feel better so you will spend more.

  10. theealex says:

    Couldn't agree more

  11. mysterc says:

    The beatles were an overrated boy band with 5 great songs. They had some good songs, but only 5 were great. Doesn't matter which 5 you choose, but you can only come up with 5.

    • ppezaris says:

      I'll bite. Here's 12 (really 13).

      1. Yesterday - an absolute rock classic
      2. Elanor Rigby - name another rock song of this caliber with no drums, guitar, bass guitar or piano
      3. Strawberry Fields Forever / Penny Lane - two timeless masterpieces
      4. Hey Jude - go ahead, just try not to sing along to this one
      5. Help! - backing vocals introduce main melody brilliantly
      6. I Saw Her Standing There - how could I dance with another? WHOOOOOO!
      7. A Day in the Life - this, along with I Am The Walrus, show the dynamic range of this "pop band"
      8. Paperback Writer - the interplay of the harmonic vocals and guitar riff set the mood
      9. Blackbird - melodic genius
      10. While My Guitar Gently Weeps - a rare gem by George
      11. Here Comes the Sun - another George gem
      12. I Am The Walrus - everybody smoke pot?

      • gwynjudd says:

        Did you know Strawberry Fields was the other side of the Penny Lane single?

        Legend has it John was sleeping one day and he dreamed a melody and when he woke up he wrote it down and it was the tune to "Yesterday".

      • mysterc says:

        1. Yesterday
        Granted-thats 1
        2. Eleanor Rigby-Great song done better by Ray Charles.
        3.Strawbery Fields Forever/Penny Lane-
        Good songs, but Great? I mean Really earth shattering great? How about an exceptional 60's Pop Song?
        4. Hey Jude- ok not a favorite of mine, but I can see the appeal.
        5. Help- Crap
        6. I saw her standing there- not even close to a GREAT Song. Compared to other songs of the same time period? Average at best.
        7. Day in the life- See above.
        8. Paperback writer- one of my favorite Beatle tunes, I wouldn't put it in my top 5 tho.
        9. Blackbird- granted
        10. Where My Guitar Ently Weeps-Honestly, not a GREAT Song. Good? Yes. Great?... I'll call it personal choice
        11. Here Comes the Sun- Granted. Although I could argue that it was typical of the time, not groundbreaking in any way and not musically much of a challenge.
        12. I am the Walrus- Backstreet Boys of the 60's I say not even a good song.

        They had some incredible production value and a really good promotion team. As musicians they were average. Lyrically, they had some incredible lyrics. But thats it. Almost all of the remakes are better than the originals. If they can be improved upon that much, they cant really be considered "Great" now can they?

        • ppezaris says:

          Almost all of the remakes are better than the originals

          While I disagree with your premise, are you seriously suggesting there is a requirement that the original is the "best" recording in order to consider the song great? The song Yesterday, for example, has been covered more than 2,400 times. By your argument, if you prefer any of those 2,400 remakes to the original, that somehow takes away from the songs original greatness? Hogwash.

          For the record, I'm not sure I've heard a single Beatles cover that I would honestly consider to be superior to the original.

          • mysterc says:

            Yesterday for example... I granted as one of their great songs. And yes, I think in order to be a "great" song the original should stand up on its own as the best version.

            For the record- Ray Charles- Eleanor Rigby. Hell, Ray Charles's Yesterday is my preference. But thats cause I think Ray Charles is a superior musician to (insert Beatle here).

    • baconmonkey says:

      The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, and Jimi Hedrix have one thing in common:

      Little Richard.

      The Beatles and the Rolling Stones were at different times, his opening acts. Hendrix played guitar for him in 1964.

      Add to that the fact that James Brown called Little Richard his idol...

      also, from wikipedia:

      In his high school year book, Bob Dylan declared that his ambition was "to join the band of Little Richard." In 1969, Elvis Presley told Little Richard, "Your music has inspired me - you are the greatest." Otis Redding, John Lennon, Paul McCartney, George Harrison, Ringo Starr, Mick Jagger, Keith Richards, Pete Townshend, Roger Daltrey, John Fogerty, Dick Dale, Bob Seger, Jimi Hendrix, Bob Marley, Robert Plant, Jimmy Page, Jeff Beck, Eric Clapton, David Bowie, and numerous other rock & roll icons have also cited Little Richard as being one of their first major influences.

      I believe the votes are in and we have a winner.

  12. yeah, but what about elvis?

  13. buz says:

    Which "Beatles"?
    The bubblegum pop group?
    The group that really wished they were Little Richard?
    The druggie group?

    I <3 the Pixies a hella lot, but I wanted to hang myself after watching loudQUIETloud. Why is it that all great artists are idiots?

    I knew a guy who asked everyone, "Beatles or Stones" when he met them. You were then judged accordingly by him from then on - no discussion. I found this "unique and intriguing", but also trite (there - I said "trite" - I've archived metrosexuality without having any hair product ...or hair).

    Most "important"? I might argue that Bill Haley was the Johnny Appleseed of rock n' roll. Then the Ramones/Sex Pistols did it again 20 years later.

    But fuck all of them, Lee De Forest is the most important. We'd all still be listening to jug bands without him.

  14. I thought that the Pixies WERE The Beatles...

    I just thought Ringo was expressing a new identity by learning how to "Deal".

  15. xinit says:

    Yes, I'd agree that Pixies are more important than The Beatles, and agree that they were much more musically talented than the four Brits.

    However, I might make a case that the White Album was singularly more important as a total work than any of the albums the Pixies put out.

  16. latemodel says:

    I like the Pixies, really I do. Probably better than the Beatles.

    But who have they ever influenced? Nirvana? The Kelly Deal 5000? Being Important means that people listened, and the world was a better place for it.

    • rpkrajewski says:

      Don't forget (early) Radiohead.

      I wouldn't say that all melodic indie rock with noticeable dynamic range owes its existence to the Pixies, but there was certainly a lot of more of it after them than before them.

      I'd say that influence/importance of the Beatles was on a different level than the Pixies, but it's not because they're so superior - sure, they were talented, fun, and creative, but they were also in the right place at the right time, were not afraid to nick from hipper influences, and got to influence a bigger swath of pop culture than the Pixies ever could just because rock was so much more wide open in 1964 than 1988.

  17. option12 says:

    First JWZ post I remember without
    [ music | SomethingRelevantHere ]

    And I kinda wanted to know

  18. wfaulk says:

    Where does the Velvet Underground fit into this inequality?