Unpopular Opinions You Hold

[swanlee]

23 hours ago, Line-X said:

George Harrison was 19 when they recorded their debut album...what actually constitutes your definition of a "boy band"? 

 

According to Wikipedia: -

 

'A boy band is loosely defined as a vocal group consisting of young male singers, usually in their teenage years or in their twenties at the time of formation, singing love songs marketed towards young women.'

 

I happy to go with that.

[swanlee]

23 hours ago, Line-X said:

Secondly, despite your previous contentions, (although I may well be mistaken), I'm confident that Stockhausen wasn't  necessarily the "sound of the 60s" that you were originally referring to. So what precisely were the Beatles "aping"?

They were aping everything and everything was aping them.

 

At the risk of repeating myself, from a previous post on this very same subject: 'They were obviously talented and adaptable. They were able to transcend differing epochs in music, reinventing themselves numerously and absorbing the sounds, styles and attitudes that evolved around them during the 60's.'

 

tbf 'Sound of the 60's' does sound like the title of a bargain basement CD you'd find for £2.99 in a Tesco Megastore. While the CD contains all the big hits of popular beat combo's from that era, for the sake of this argument, yes, I am including Stockhausen and his body of work.

 

And this list also includes everything artistically, poetically, literary, socially, politically and of course musically. Can I also add globally?

Edited 17 November 2019 by swanlee

[The Bear]

12 hours ago, Otis said:

So you can live in £10K a year for the next 50 years?

 

Or am i missing something?

My Grandfather died in his 70s from a heart attack, and my father in his mid 50s from cancer. 

 

If I live to be 90 it'll be a small miracle. My expenses per year aren't high, and I already have a savings and investments portfolio which I started when I was 21. Plus I have whatever my pension will be. 

 

Half a million quid can go a long way if you're not stupid with it. The interest alone would be a couple of hundred quid a week I reckon. 

[Sampson]

Edit: nm.

Edited 17 November 2019 by Sampson

[Otis]

10 hours ago, The Bear said:

My Grandfather died in his 70s from a heart attack, and my father in his mid 50s from cancer. 

 

If I live to be 90 it'll be a small miracle. My expenses per year aren't high, and I already have a savings and investments portfolio which I started when I was 21. Plus I have whatever my pension will be. 

 

Half a million quid can go a long way if you're not stupid with it. The interest alone would be a couple of hundred quid a week I reckon. 

Of course, and you'll have a state pension once you reach 68 so you could afford to spend more up to that age.

£500K at 2% is £10K per year interest - less tax. But this will slowly reduce as the capital is reduced. If you're sensible and have low living expenses then it is possible.

 

[SpacedX]

On 16/11/2019 at 23:58, swanlee said:

 

According to Wikipedia: -

 

'A boy band is loosely defined as a vocal group consisting of young male singers, usually in their teenage years or in their twenties at the time of formation, singing love songs marketed towards young women.'

 

"loosely defined" indeed. So anyone forming a band in their teens or twenties satisfies the first criterion. The second...The Brian Epstein business model lasted all of of what? - two and a half years?

 

 

Edited 18 November 2019 by Line-X

[SpacedX]

On 17/11/2019 at 00:17, swanlee said:

They were aping everything and everything was aping them.

 

At the risk of repeating myself, from a previous post on this very same subject: 'They were obviously talented and adaptable. They were able to transcend differing epochs in music, reinventing themselves numerously and absorbing the sounds, styles and attitudes that evolved around them during the 60's.'

 

tbf 'Sound of the 60's' does sound like the title of a bargain basement CD you'd find for £2.99 in a Tesco Megastore. While the CD contains all the big hits of popular beat combo's from that era, for the sake of this argument, yes, I am including Stockhausen and his body of work.

 

And this list also includes everything artistically, poetically, literary, socially, politically and of course musically. Can I also add globally?

The sixties was a period of remarkable cultural change and osmosis. Of course they were permeated by influences, but in terms of popular music, they were also way ahead of their peers in both vision and as composers. From 1966, largely due to the consummate skill and technical brilliance of Geoff Emerick, they were creating sounds and inventing production techniques that defied the restrictions of the era. The engineering on Revolver, Pepper and Abbey Road is remarkable.  

 

Lennon fancied himself as the next Stockhausen and very much felt that was the direction they should be going in. They had already recorded Carnival of Light. which was never released and 'Revolution 9', (most likely influenced by Hymnen), 'Life With the Lions' and the 'Two Virgins' pretty much confirmed that contrary to his belief...he really wasn't. 

[Blarmy]

On 16/11/2019 at 23:58, swanlee said:

 

According to Wikipedia: -

 

'A boy band is loosely defined as a vocal group consisting of young male singers, usually in their teenage years or in their twenties at the time of formation, singing love songs marketed towards young women.'

 

I happy to go with that.

Vocal group/singers?  The Beatles also played instruments. 

[swanlee]

7 hours ago, Blarmy said:

Vocal group/singers?  The Beatles also played instruments. 

So did Bros 

 

Look, I didn't really mean to upset so many people. But as a music fan, I've never been able to get into The Beatles. This despite the fact that, as a music fan, there're times when I feel like I should like them.

 

An while I can admit that Strawberry Fields, Paperback Writer, Day Tripper and Across The Universe are stunningly good songs. As a bloke in his 40's, I have (and always have had) a hard time relating to songs like Love Me Do and I Want To Hold Your Hand. Let's just say that they reflect attitudes that are somewhat dated.

 

And then there're all those screaming girls! I have seen the film A Hard Days Night. Back in those early days, they certainly were not trying to play Beatlemania down. The exact opposite in fact.

Edited 18 November 2019 by swanlee

[SpacedX]

30 minutes ago, swanlee said:

So did Bros 

 

Look, I didn't really mean to upset so many people. But as a music fan, I've never been able to get into The Beatles. This despite the fact that, as a music fan, there're times when I feel like I should like them.

 

An while I can admit that Strawberry Fields, Paperback Writer, Day Tripper and Across The Universe are stunningly good songs. As a bloke in his 40's, I have (and always have had) a hard time relating to songs like Love Me Do and I Want To Hold Your Hand. Let's just say that they reflect attitudes that are somewhat dated.

 

And then there're all those screaming girls! I have seen the film A Hard Days Night. Back in those early days, they certainly were not trying to play Beatlemania down. The exact opposite in fact.

I do understand - and I understand the nature of this thread, but your initial comment did come across as rather uninformed and you can of course hold opinions without being opinionated, even though judging from your subsequent posts, that is clearly not the case.  I really can't listen to anything pre 'Hard Day's Night' although the following year, 1965 was when it really started to get interesting. 

 

Excuse me for bumping the following which I wrote a few years ago on "The Beatles' thread in response to a similar claim...

 

A Boyband implies a manufactured synthetic group which the Beatles most certainly were not. Their inception was of their own making, and from their beginnings in skiffle through rough edged rockn'roll to the eventual, albeit, manicured polished product that Brian Epstein honed becoming the first British group to crack the States, opening the door to the British invasion, they nonetheless learnt their trade on the road out of the back of a Commer van and during their right of passage at the Indra and the Kaiserkeller Hamburg. During their two stints in Germany they often performed four sets, typically between 8.00pm and 2.00am weekdays and five to six at the weekends. When they returned to Liverpool they were polished, tight, professional and peerless live. They came to loath Beatlemania and its trappings - particularly Lennon and Harrison, and their rise through relentless touring to being the first stadium band preceded the technology. In an era without foldback and minus a p.a. system, this intuitive chemistry carried them through the fact that they could rarely hear themselves or each other onstage which was one of the main reasons they jacked touring in '66 and became a studio band. Brian Wilson had done it as a writer and producer...and so would they. When they walked off-stage for the last time at Candlestick Park San Francisco, Brian Epstein reputedly looked lost and despairingly was heard to say 'what so I do now?' Within a year he had taken his own life.

 

Although guided by the commercial acumen and acute business brain of Epstein, and buoyed by the musical brilliance of Martin and the eventual innovative engineering of Emerick, very early on the Beatles had carte-blanche over their artistic direction. Again, another crucial aspect that a Boyband invariably lacks. Sure, they were steered into making the cash cow prescriptive movies in 'Hard Day's Night' and 'Help'- and were constantly hounded for a product by EMI, musically they charted their own course. In fact, I would contend that the first real manufactured synthetic Boyband was in fact the Monkees...and the main template behind their artificial confection was 'A Hard Day's Night'. So indirectly, perhaps you are right in saying that they spawned the concept of the Boyband too.

 

Their concepts were their own, and of their design. Each album was a prerequisite for the next. Broadly, Lennon was all about conceptualisation, McCartney the execution, although by 1967 McCartney seized control of their artistic direction and initially, their business decisions. So many contemporaries were content to churn out the same formulaic insipid radio friendly throwaway pop. The genius of the Beatles was that their mass appeal didn't compromise their progressive experimentation and adventurous songwriting. As unoriginal as Revolution 9 may be, it nonetheless introduced avant-garde to millions of homes even though the masses loathed it. They redefined the genre and although not beyond borderline plagiarism themselves, continually rewrote the rules. Hey Jude at more than seven minutes in length was commercial suicide. As a double A side with Revolution, it became the longest single to top the British charts. In their nine year recording history, they never stagnated and their fecundity was remarkable - particularly since they had ceased to operate as a band by 1968. Within seven and a half years they went from 'Please Please Me' to 'Abbey Road'. Practically everyone on the planet is familiar with a Beatles song, often without knowing them by the brand or band name. Slavishly marketed yes, but much of the music transcended that and speaks for itself. 

 

Incidentally, have you seen the Ron Howard film 'Eight Days a Week? I think you'd find it very interesting. 

[swanlee]

1 hour ago, Line-X said:

I do understand - and I understand the nature of this thread, but your initial comment did come across as rather uninformed and you can of course hold opinions without being opinionated, even though judging from your subsequent posts, that is clearly not the case.  I really can't listen to anything pre 'Hard Day's Night' although the following year, 1965 was when it really started to get interesting. 

 

Excuse me for bumping the following which I wrote a few years ago on "The Beatles' thread in response to a similar claim...

 

A Boyband implies a manufactured synthetic group which the Beatles most certainly were not. Their inception was of their own making, and from their beginnings in skiffle through rough edged rockn'roll to the eventual, albeit, manicured polished product that Brian Epstein honed becoming the first British group to crack the States, opening the door to the British invasion, they nonetheless learnt their trade on the road out of the back of a Commer van and during their right of passage at the Indra and the Kaiserkeller Hamburg. During their two stints in Germany they often performed four sets, typically between 8.00pm and 2.00am weekdays and five to six at the weekends. When they returned to Liverpool they were polished, tight, professional and peerless live. They came to loath Beatlemania and its trappings - particularly Lennon and Harrison, and their rise through relentless touring to being the first stadium band preceded the technology. In an era without foldback and minus a p.a. system, this intuitive chemistry carried them through the fact that they could rarely hear themselves or each other onstage which was one of the main reasons they jacked touring in '66 and became a studio band. Brian Wilson had done it as a writer and producer...and so would they. When they walked off-stage for the last time at Candlestick Park San Francisco, Brian Epstein reputedly looked lost and despairingly was heard to say 'what so I do now?' Within a year he had taken his own life.

 

Although guided by the commercial acumen and acute business brain of Epstein, and buoyed by the musical brilliance of Martin and the eventual innovative engineering of Emerick, very early on the Beatles had carte-blanche over their artistic direction. Again, another crucial aspect that a Boyband invariably lacks. Sure, they were steered into making the cash cow prescriptive movies in 'Hard Day's Night' and 'Help'- and were constantly hounded for a product by EMI, musically they charted their own course. In fact, I would contend that the first real manufactured synthetic Boyband was in fact the Monkees...and the main template behind their artificial confection was 'A Hard Day's Night'. So indirectly, perhaps you are right in saying that they spawned the concept of the Boyband too.

 

Their concepts were their own, and of their design. Each album was a prerequisite for the next. Broadly, Lennon was all about conceptualisation, McCartney the execution, although by 1967 McCartney seized control of their artistic direction and initially, their business decisions. So many contemporaries were content to churn out the same formulaic insipid radio friendly throwaway pop. The genius of the Beatles was that their mass appeal didn't compromise their progressive experimentation and adventurous songwriting. As unoriginal as Revolution 9 may be, it nonetheless introduced avant-garde to millions of homes even though the masses loathed it. They redefined the genre and although not beyond borderline plagiarism themselves, continually rewrote the rules. Hey Jude at more than seven minutes in length was commercial suicide. As a double A side with Revolution, it became the longest single to top the British charts. In their nine year recording history, they never stagnated and their fecundity was remarkable - particularly since they had ceased to operate as a band by 1968. Within seven and a half years they went from 'Please Please Me' to 'Abbey Road'. Practically everyone on the planet is familiar with a Beatles song, often without knowing them by the brand or band name. Slavishly marketed yes, but much of the music transcended that and speaks for itself. 

 

Incidentally, have you seen the Ron Howard film 'Eight Days a Week? I think you'd find it very interesting. 

Yes my initial comments were churlish. But I thought in keeping with the theme of a thread entitled Unpopular Opinions.

 

Fisrtly many thanks for your considered & informed replies. Very interesting. 

 

Secondly may I say i have an eclectic mix of weird and wonderful sounds amongst my music collection. I take it for granted that not everybody is going to appreciate my tastes. Subsequently when people do dismiss the music I like because they see, for whatever reason, no validity in it. Then that is their loss. The music I enjoy enriches my life in so many ways. The fact they get no pleasure out it does not upset me or make me angry. Worryingly though I seem to have stroked up some indignation with my initial comments with regards The Fab Four.

 

To explain, to those of us music fans that have tried but cannot get The Beatles. We have to endure what I can only describe as hyperbole. Did Lennon not contest himself that they were part of a movement in the late 60's and not all of it? To listen to some you would think otherwise. Some of us music fans get a little miffed at the credit heaped upon them not just creatively but also culturally as well. 

 

And you beat me to it with boy bands. Because while The Beatles were certainly not a manufactured band. I do feel in many respects they inadvertently helped define the template. And I am sure we can both agree that the music industry can be a cynical business that is very much driven by the profit motive.

 

 

Edited 18 November 2019 by swanlee

[Jattdogg]

Well, i too don't care for the Beatles. Granted i am almost 40 so perhaps not part of my era. I do try to keep an open mind when it comes to music however i just don't dig them.  I wouldn't say they are shite just not my cup of tea and perhaps over rated a tad. To each their own.

 

....Let me get that tupac CD out.... queue the hate

[String fellow]

Given the link between John Lennon and Karlheinz Stockhausen, one wonders what JL would have made of KS's incredibly daft Helicopter Quartet, composed 13 years after Lennon's murder. Would the other members of the Fab Four perhaps have been persuaded to record something, whilst all flying in different helicopters? Personally, I'd have preferred JL to have been linked with John Cage, which may then have resulted in a Beatles equivalent of JC's 4'33'', a much more appealing prospect!

[Silebyfox_89]

The new Ikea advert is the best TV advertising of the year.

[Sampson]

I don't mind The Beatles either way, but I have to agree with what was said earlier that John Lennon was lucky to live in the era he did. He was a really pretty nasty man who if he lived today would be a pretty much universal hate figure.

 

Still nowhere near as much as Jimmy Page though, who given he's still alive and all the alleged (pretty open secrets) stuff he got up to about kidnapping girls of 14 and allegedly younger, I'm very surprised he hasn't had serious criminal investigation into in recent years.

[UpTheLeagueFox]

Pochettino did a very good job moving Spurs forward, played some attractive football and, from my occasional media experience with him, seemed a pretty decent, genuine bloke too.

If he rocked up at LCFC when BR moves on I think we'd be in good hands.

 

(*dons tin hat)

[UniFox21]

20 minutes ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

Pochettino did a very good job moving Spurs forward, played some attractive football and, from my occasional media experience with him, seemed a pretty decent, genuine bloke too.

If he rocked up at LCFC when BR moves on I think we'd be in good hands.

 

(*dons tin hat)

Agree with you tbh. Think everyone admits he did a bloody good job turning spurs into a top 4 club. Just fell short in terms of trophy winning, probably not helped by Levy not backing him fully.

[Corky]

23 minutes ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

 

If he rocked up at LCFC when BR moves on I think we'd be in good hands.

 

(*dons tin hat)

God no. Some of the efforts to pronounce his name in the ground would be horrendous.

[Finnegan]

9 hours ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

Pochettino did a very good job moving Spurs forward, played some attractive football and, from my occasional media experience with him, seemed a pretty decent, genuine bloke too.

If he rocked up at LCFC when BR moves on I think we'd be in good hands.

 

(*dons tin hat)

 

My problem with Poch is the lack of mental toughness in Spurs. The whole bottle thing makes for a good joke but it's actually one that comes from a place of truth. 

 

The personality of a good manager should mould the personality of a squad. You could see Pearson's imprint on our team, stubborn, hard working, never gave up. You could see Mourinho's mark on his Chelsea sides, arrogant, confident, winners. Klopp, Pep, you can do the same. 

 

So when a team has a persistent flaw in character do you not have to apply the same logic? 

 

It certainly doesn't appeal when he's in front of cameras a year or two after 15/16 still bleating about how other teams tried harder against Spurs than Leicester, telling Leicester fans "you have our trophy" and generally acting like a sulky, entitled boy with no idea how to carry a team across the line. 

 

And that's just how his teams play. Sulky, entitled, moaning, mentally immature with no idea how to win. 

[Wymsey]

Assisted suicide should be allowed by law, especially as the affected person will know they won't suffer no more from his condition if their life is carefully ended by a loved one with dignity.

[ajthefox]

14 hours ago, Corky said:

God no. Some of the efforts to pronounce his name in the ground would be horrendous.

Morrisey-o Pottychinos

[bovril]

7 hours ago, Finnegan said:

 

My problem with Poch is the lack of mental toughness in Spurs. The whole bottle thing makes for a good joke but it's actually one that comes from a place of truth. 

 

The personality of a good manager should mould the personality of a squad. You could see Pearson's imprint on our team, stubborn, hard working, never gave up. You could see Mourinho's mark on his Chelsea sides, arrogant, confident, winners. Klopp, Pep, you can do the same. 

 

So when a team has a persistent flaw in character do you not have to apply the same logic? 

 

It certainly doesn't appeal when he's in front of cameras a year or two after 15/16 still bleating about how other teams tried harder against Spurs than Leicester, telling Leicester fans "you have our trophy" and generally acting like a sulky, entitled boy with no idea how to carry a team across the line. 

 

And that's just how his teams play. Sulky, entitled, moaning, mentally immature with no idea how to win. 

 

3 hours ago, Wymeswold fox said:

Assisted suicide should be allowed by law, especially as the affected person will know they won't suffer no more from his condition if their life is carefully ended by a loved one with dignity.

I opened this, started reading Finnegan's post and completely forgot what thread it was. So then moving on to Wymesy's was a bit confusing. 

[Merging Cultures]

On 17/11/2019 at 21:37, Otis said:

Of course, and you'll have a state pension once you reach 68 so you could afford to spend more up to that age.

£500K at 2% is £10K per year interest - less tax. But this will slowly reduce as the capital is reduced. If you're sensible and have low living expenses then it is possible.

 

Are you familiar with FIRE (Financially Independent and Retire Early)? Have about it.

[Parafox]

On 21/11/2019 at 11:56, Wymeswold fox said:

Assisted suicide should be allowed by law, especially as the affected person will know they won't suffer no more from his condition if their life is carefully ended by a loved one with dignity.

I don't think this is an unpopular opinion. Most compassionate people probably think the same. It's the government and the courts and some medical people and religious factions that put up objections. I agree there are risks involved in making premature decisions, but mainly the patient and their family know the inevitable outcome. In my job, I often see people at the end of their life. Until the last couple of years, we were obliged to resuscitate unless there was a Do Not Resuscitate document available. Now we can offer support and give prescribed end of life drugs to allow the patient to leave with dignity, and the relatives to be able to say goodbye without the trauma of a full on scene resus, which is not pleasant.

If I was terminally ill, I would not want myself or my closest to suffer the pain and distress of a lingering, inevitable death. I cannot understand why we aren't given the choice. 

[Parafox]

Emily Maitliss is hot!