Fine Garbage since 2003.
CURRENT PROJECT:
-Paying off a massive amount of debt in college loans.
-Working in television.
DaVince This fool just HAD to have a custom rating
Registered 04/09/2004
Points 7998
19th April, 2006 at 15:50:11 -
Bah, I couldn't edit my post anymore.
Sure, they were overrated, but what do you want? They made commercial music that became very popular. And I might tell you they do play and sing themselves.
They are ok by me. Absolutely not the best, but at least they tried to play reasonable music, unlike those hip-hop and rap stuff you have nowadays where people just do it for the money and not for the music.
None of them can really sing, and none of them can really play an instrument.
They are horribly over-rated, and you know it.
The remaining Beetles are suing I-Pod because they want half the prophets. That makes me hate them even more.
Two of them are dead, so I just have to take out the other two.
Anyone agree?
Sure, people fall heads over heels for them but they are a legacy. Every song is the same possibly means you've listened to 3 or 4 songs and thats it.
None of them can sing or play an instrument? What a crock of shit statement, John Lennon had one of the greatest voices in entertainment. Paul McCartney is one of the greatest musicians in the world at the moment, if you've ever listened to Blackbird I'm sure your opinion would change a slight bit.
Btw, Paul and Ringo (the remaining Beatles) aren't suing Apple. Apple Corps is, which was founded by the group. Because Apple has no license to sell songs owned by Apple Corps it is illegal. Any other record company would do the exact same thing if another company was selling songs without a license to do so.
Paul may have a horrible personality, but he is a living legend.
If you don't like their music then that's fine, but don't go ahead and start saying open statements such as that.
Lol, Lazarus you are a tool man! This is the most entertaining joke post made on TDC since the infamous 'female klikkers' topic.
Please, state your "favourite bands" here so I can take delight in ripping the proverbial piss out of their lack of talent.
You've heard almost every Beatles song? LMFAO. I doubt that statement, chump. I have 8 or 9 CD-R's packed with hundreds of bootlegs, rarities, covers and unreleased outtakes which I doubt you'd even know how to get a hold of, never mind have had the pleasure of listening to
Generally, I find that pre-90's music fucking OWNS the majority of the commercial shit being churned out now.
Go listen to some Buddy Holly. That young man was a Genius.
Cya n00b
Edited by the Author.
By a route obscure and lonely,
Haunted by ill angels only,
Where an Eidolon, named night,
On a black throne reigns upright,
I have reached these lands but newly
From an ultimate dim Thule
From a wild clime that lieth, sublime,
Out of space
Out of time.
Is this 'controversial' topic a pathetically desperate attempt to gain some attention?
Nice try
Edited by the Author.
By a route obscure and lonely,
Haunted by ill angels only,
Where an Eidolon, named night,
On a black throne reigns upright,
I have reached these lands but newly
From an ultimate dim Thule
From a wild clime that lieth, sublime,
Out of space
Out of time.
Laz, I dont think anyone will agree with what you have said if they understand what good music is.
I like alot of music, new and old (except rap/hip hop which is utter shit) if you want to moan about music take a look at 50cents crappy lyrics and sound.
Jay-Z is very, very crap too check his lyrics out for a good laugh
"you shoot my cat, i'll kill yo dawg"
The Beatles music may be old now but none of the new groups even comes in the same league.
I completely agree with lazarus. Although it cant really be argued, its personal taste, lazarus should have perhaps put "I think the Beetles suck" instead of making it a statement.
I may not like listening to them, but you have to admit they started the mainstream acceptance of the rock movement. They certainly didn't "suck" they were quite good at what they did; I just never cared for them.
Um, it might be because i'm an iPod owner (and an apple fan), but I think the iPod and iTunes are getting sued way to much. First the french for not opening up iTunes songs so they can be played on any player , who cares? Then, Apple music suing Apple computers for use of the Apple name, What difference does it make? Now they're getting sued for some patent, even though every music player ever released infringes on it at leart partially... Poor apple...
They were okay. Abbey Road, The White Album, and Sgt. Pepper's better than the rest of their discography. I believe they had a tiny part in inspiring the progressive rock movement of the 70s. I don't really listen to them on a regular basis, but I respect some of their stuff.
Who needs another player with an i preceding its name?
What bothers me the most is how it keeps my music in order.
I miss the fingerprints too.
http://www.uhu.ch/images/iaudio_x5.gif
I use the shuffle 'cause it's one of the smallest players out there, and it doesn't have a screen to get scratvhed or anything. I wouldn't know about sound quality of anything 'cause I just listen to podcasts...
Anyway, iLike a lot of apple products. You people probably just don't like Mac OS X (Pronounced Mac OS 10, because Mac OS X sounds like Mac O Sex) becuase you've never used it for a long period of time and tried all of it's features. My mom has an Intel based 17in iMac and it's just awsome! And now with boot camp ... *starts drooling*
I don't like Mac OS X because it's incapable of running Multimedia Fusion, Modplug Tracker, the vast majority of retro DOS games, Paint.net, or indeed any program that I would want to run ever.
Eleanor Rigby, I am the Walrus and Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds. Sure they made a lot of crap, but those three songs and others really stand out as great tracks. Yes they are overrated, so are Queen, The Clash and Jeff Buckley. Long live Kate Bush!
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by the Author.
