The beatles might not have made it if they were an American band

gnik nusgnik nus Unsigned
edited January 2010 in The Beatles: Rock Band
Yep I made another thread anyway I was wondering would the Beatles have been as big as they are now if they were an american band. Hear me out here's the senario so they would be signed to capital records now they would have been a hit making but they wouldnt have been able to progess as a band as they eventually did in england. Look how the american releases differed to the UK ones I think america record companies was afraid that the beatles were changing and changed their records so the albums had that merseybeat sound of their earlier records. Why do you think the beach boys petsounds sold so terribly capital refused to promote cause the beach boys were changing and they didnt think the beach boys more mature sound would be marketable. They would have pulled the same thing with the beatles. I think they wouldnt have gotten past beatles for sale

Comments

  • hannie3000hannie3000 Rising Star
    edited January 2010
    Try using paragraphs and proper punctuation when writing your posts, please.

    Also, I'd comment on your rant, but I believe my brain is still trying to process it.
  • SystemSCSnakeSystemSCSnake Road Warrior
    edited January 2010
    Dude....Are you really a Beatles' Fan?
  • Sargehalo51Sargehalo51 Road Warrior
    edited January 2010
    hannie3000;3436129 said:
    Try using paragraphs and proper punctuation when writing your posts, please.

    Also, I'd comment on your rant, but I believe my brain is still trying to process it.
    Couldn't agree more with the above statement!
  • olddrummerolddrummer Rising Star
    edited January 2010
    I thought they became famous in the us because of their hairdos.
  • midge-beatlesmidge-beatles Unsigned
    edited January 2010
    You do make some awful threads.
  • DakeebDakeeb Opening Act
    edited January 2010
    Jesus, you guys aren't even giving him a chance, are you? He's not dissing the Beatles, he's criticizing the American recording industry (at least in the '60s). I'm not sure if he's at all right, since I don't know enough about that period to make an intelligent statement on the matter. But, this thread doesn't deserve the hate it's getting.
  • SystemSCSnakeSystemSCSnake Road Warrior
    edited January 2010
    Dakeeb;3436905 said:
    Jesus, you guys aren't even giving him a chance, are you? He's not dissing the Beatles, he's criticizing the American recording industry (at least in the '60s). I'm not sure if he's at all right, since I don't know enough about that period to make an intelligent statement on the matter. But, this thread doesn't deserve the hate it's getting.
    You're wrong, this thread is saying if they were an American band he doubts the Beatles music' would make it far. What's wrong with that? You might say, but that means he is actually lowering the standard of what the Beatles accomplished. The only possible way the Beatles would not have made it one way or another, is if the four never met each other. Once Again, He is criticizing the American recording industry, but you do know The Beatles made 11 albums in America, the first not even being under Capitol records. I think the Beatles music is far superior, for any kind of company to reject. Also, wasn't the Beach Boys Pet Sounds album, on of their best albums?
  • gnik nusgnik nus Unsigned
    edited January 2010
    Pet Sounds is their most critically acclaimed album, but it failed to sell well due to Capitol Records not promoting the record, because the sound of the album differed from earlier Beach Boy's releases. Capitol wanted the boys to continue their more mainstream Surf Rock sound.
  • SystemSCSnakeSystemSCSnake Road Warrior
    edited January 2010
    gnik nus;3436964 said:
    Pet Sounds is their most critically acclaimed album, but it failed to sell well due to Capitol Records not promoting the record, because the sound of the album differed from earlier Beach Boy's releases. Capitol wanted the boys to continue their more mainstream Surf Rock sound.
    Oh, also you know Capitol Records were the Beatles' record company too for a while..right? The Beatles also slowly progressed into their psychedelic sounds.
  • gnik nusgnik nus Unsigned
    edited January 2010
    Look at the foolishness Capitol did with the beatles' LP's eg. using songs from "Help!" and putting them Rubber Soul ,also Yesterday and Today which they released Revolver songs with Help and Rubber Soul songs.

    Capitol knew The Beatles were evolving and they were afraid, they wanted them to continue to be that hit making group from Liverpool, so they altered their LP's but by Pepper nothing could be done.
  • SystemSCSnakeSystemSCSnake Road Warrior
    edited January 2010
    gnik nus;3437003 said:
    Look at the foolishness Capitol did with the beatles' LP's eg. using songs from "Help!" and putting them Rubber Soul ,also Yesterday and Today which they released Revolver songs with Help and Rubber Soul songs.

    Capitol knew The Beatles were evolving and they were afraid, they wanted them to continue to be that hit making group from Liverpool, so they altered their LP's but by Pepper nothing could be done.
    By Rubber Soul and Revolver they were too late. Those albums were too good of albums though, and you only speak of US albums, which were altered because the US got different songs at different times. However like all companies, $$$ comes first, and the beatles were racking in A LOT with their musical talent, they could care less, they knew it was the right direction.
  • SetherexSetherex Rising Star
    edited January 2010
    hannie3000;3436129 said:
    Try using paragraphs and proper punctuation when writing your posts, please.
    This^

    I would also say that my brain is still trying to process your post, if I bothered to read the entire thing.
  • gnik nusgnik nus Unsigned
    edited January 2010
    The Beatles were able to evolve because EMI allowed them to be self indulgent you know hours in the studio experimenting etc. I know for a fact that they would not be able to do this under Capitol.

    The Beatles changing their sound from from Merseybeat/Folk to Psychedelia would be too much of a gamble, and Capitol would not have allowed it. Therefore The Beatles would would have continued with their early sound and not getting past Beatles for Sale.
  • SystemSCSnakeSystemSCSnake Road Warrior
    edited January 2010
    gnik nus;3437026 said:
    The Beatles were able to evolve because EMI allowed them to be self indulgent you know hours in the studio experimenting etc. I know for a fact that they would not be able to do this under Capitol.

    The Beatles changing their sound from from Merseybeat/Folk to Psychedelia would be too much of a gamble, and Capitol would not have allowed it. Therefore The Beatles would would have continued with their early sound and not getting past Beatles for Sale.
    No they wouldn't.....You don't get it, even if Capitol would have not allowed it the Beatles made it too far anyway, and would be able to move on from Capitol....All your doing is bashing Capitol Records, not "If they were an American Band," if they were still the same people, they would have made it as far as they have to day period.
  • DakeebDakeeb Opening Act
    edited January 2010
    How far a band makes it is partly dependent on their surroundings. Under the wrong conditions, there are a million different ways the Beatles would never have gotten off the ground; if they hadn't auditioned for George Martin, for example. He seems to have been the only producer in England who "got" what they were about, and gave them a contract despite them not having any better songs than Love Me Do. All on a hunch. Who else would do that?

    So it's not all talent, you need a great deal of luck to go along with it, and it's very, very, VERY possible that if the Beatles had started in America, we would never have heard of them. I don't agree with the topic creator's idea that Capitol would have squashed their creative growth or whatever, but I do believe in the general idea that tons upon tons of things could have prevented the Beatles from being what they are today.
  • SystemSCSnakeSystemSCSnake Road Warrior
    edited January 2010
    Dakeeb;3437048 said:
    How far a band makes it is partly dependent on their surroundings. Under the wrong conditions, there are a million different ways the Beatles would never have gotten off the ground; if they hadn't auditioned for George Martin, for example. He seems to have been the only producer in England who "got" what they were about, and gave them a contract despite them not having any better songs than Love Me Do. All on a hunch. Who else would do that?

    So it's not all talent, you need a great deal of luck to go along with it, and it's very, very, VERY possible that if the Beatles had started in America, we would never have heard of them. I don't agree with the topic creator's idea that Capitol would have squashed their creative growth or whatever, but I do believe in the general idea that tons upon tons of things could have prevented the Beatles from being what they are today.
    It's true I never considered Brian Epstein or George Martin, but in the world of possibilites, there is a million more different ways that the Beatles could have gotten to where they were, and a million more ways they could be successful, and a million more ways they could have at least been a well received band
  • SisterRaySisterRay Opening Act
    edited January 2010
    gnik nus;3436964 said:
    Pet Sounds is their most critically acclaimed album, but it failed to sell well due to Capitol Records not promoting the record, because the sound of the album differed from earlier Beach Boy's releases. Capitol wanted the boys to continue their more mainstream Surf Rock sound.
    Please this honestly sounds like a Beach Boy fan who is pissed off. Give some credit at least the Beatles American recording company were hardly good to the Beatles at the start. They thought British Rock bands would not make it here. By the time the Beatles released "I Want to Hold Your Hand" Capitol records had no choice to give in to the Beatles because they were selling millions of records.

    I like the Beach Boys but the story is old it was the other Beach Boys who were not supportive of what Brian Wilson was doing. As for the Beatles they influenced Brian Wilson with Rubber Soul and basically packed it in when he heard "Strawberry Fields Forever". The influence went both ways but it's history now
  • SisterRaySisterRay Opening Act
    edited January 2010
    gnik nus;3436120 said:
    Yep I made another thread anyway I was wondering would the Beatles have been as big as they are now if they were an american band. Hear me out here's the senario so they would be signed to capital records now they would have been a hit making but they wouldnt have been able to progess as a band as they eventually did in england. Look how the american releases differed to the UK ones I think america record companies was afraid that the beatles were changing and changed their records so the albums had that merseybeat sound of their earlier records. Why do you think the beach boys petsounds sold so terribly capital refused to promote cause the beach boys were changing and they didnt think the beach boys more mature sound would be marketable. They would have pulled the same thing with the beatles. I think they wouldnt have gotten past beatles for sale


    You know the story about how the Beatles were asked to do a cover song on their first single and refused to do it because they wanted to make it with their own songs. They had enough confidence to force change.

    Well the thing is the Beatles were not American and part of their sound lies in British Skiffle which is why they sounded different than most of their American counterparts. The fact is they were British and they had to deal with the stigma that British Rock bands could not succeed in America. So they had to deal with and change the Record Industry belief that British Rock couldn't make it here. Hence when they broke through the British Invasion started and that is one of the main reasons why the British Invasion was so important to American music.
  • Rockbandfan23467Rockbandfan23467 Headliner
    edited January 2010
    Don't be too hard on Capitol, American Rubber Soul is a significant album.
  • gnik nusgnik nus Unsigned
    edited January 2010
    Im not Beach Boys fan (Although I did enjoy Pet Sounds and Capitol altered TheBeatles LP way too much for me to not go easy on them. Rockbandfan23467 look at the track listing for that "album" Yesterday and Today.
  • SgtRubberRevolverSgtRubberRevolver Road Warrior
    edited January 2010
    Well of course his threads are terrible. He wrote Sun King backwards.
  • TerryMTerryM Opening Act
    edited January 2010
    gnik nus;3436964 said:
    Pet Sounds is their most critically acclaimed album, but it failed to sell well due to Capitol Records not promoting the record, because the sound of the album differed from earlier Beach Boy's releases. Capitol wanted the boys to continue their more mainstream Surf Rock sound.
    I think you are on to something here. If the Beatles had been American, Capitol would have forced them to record Surf Rock, just like The Beach Boys.

    I think the first single would have been 'Love Me, Dude'.
  • gnik nusgnik nus Unsigned
    edited January 2010
    SgtRubberRevolver;3438311 said:
    Well of course his threads are terrible. He wrote Sun King backwards.
    It's a refrence to one of the songs on the The Beatles Love Album
    Gnik Nus which was Sun King reversed.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvwbAj4CEDU
  • gamegyro56gamegyro56 Road Warrior
    edited January 2010
    I think he knows that...
  • gnik nusgnik nus Unsigned
    edited January 2010
    Then he wouldn't have said what he said.
  • SgtRubberRevolverSgtRubberRevolver Road Warrior
    edited January 2010
    gamegyro56;3438409 said:
    I think he knows that...
    Yeah, you're right, I know that. It was joke regarding his awful threads.
  • gamegyro56gamegyro56 Road Warrior
    edited January 2010
    gnik nus;3438420 said:
    Then he wouldn't have said what he said.
    Your sarcasm detector is in need of a serious repair.
  • CCDaDonCCDaDon Headliner
    edited January 2010
    gnik nus;3438380 said:
    It's a refrence to one of the songs on the The Beatles Love Album
    Gnik Nus which was Sun King reversed.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvwbAj4CEDU
    First, DUH!!!!

    Second, just quit now. Sun King may be on the LOVE soundtrack, but it is officially on Abbey Road.

    Anyway, you're really trolling at this point, so yeah reported.
  • Rockbandfan23467Rockbandfan23467 Headliner
    edited January 2010
    gnik nus;3438302 said:
    Im not Beach Boys fan (Although I did enjoy Pet Sounds and Capitol altered TheBeatles LP way too much for me to not go easy on them. Rockbandfan23467 look at the track listing for that "album" Yesterday and Today.
    But the other albums weren't as out of place as Yesterday and Today. You mentioned enjoying Pet Sounds, which would not be possible without US Rubber Soul. And what about Magical Mystery Tour? That one became cannon.
  • ClipheadCliphead Rising Star
    edited January 2010
    gnik nus;3437003 said:
    Capitol knew The Beatles were evolving and they were afraid, they wanted them to continue to be that hit making group from Liverpool, so they altered their LP's but by Pepper nothing could be done.
    Capitol were chopping up their albums from the very beginning. Rubber Soul was the first one where they kept the same title and cover.
Sign In or Register to comment.