Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Krista4's Beatles 1-25 List Thread! Count down will start Mon Feb 14 noon ET. Will take new lists til then... (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter Zegras11
- Start date
landrys hat
Footballguy
I'll do a list
Uruk-Hai
Footballguy
simey
Footballguy
Hey Getz
I never submitted a top 25 list 3 years ago, but I did guess what the top 10 would be from all those list combined or something like that. I tied for 1st place, but the other guesser guessed more on the dot (I think), so that broke the tie and they won. <_< Anyway, I will do a top 25 this year. It's gonna be hard deciding what to leave off, but a lot of those cut will still make it on someone's list, and that's a good thing.
Last edited by a moderator:
Zegras11
Footballguy
I knew that. Had a Simey disclaimer in there and then erased it.Hey Getz
simey
Footballguy
I noticed that the Led Zeppelin thread is listing the person who gave the song the best ranking (it says highest so I guess that is the best, but it should say lowest, right Binky)? I have a feeling that I may have given the best ranking to a song that has been highlighted as not good by at least two people. If I am the person who gave it the most love, I will wear it like a badge of honor!
Last edited by a moderator:
Gr00vus
Footballguy
PIK95
Footballguy
Gr00vus
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
PIK95
Footballguy
PIK95
Footballguy
Zegras11
Footballguy
Zegras11
Footballguy
simey
Footballguy
I'm assuming you prefer specific songs from the Abbey Rd Medley since you took #21 and #22 instead of taking the Medley as 1 long song. During the Abbey Rd recording sessions they called the Medley "The Long One."
Zegras11
Footballguy
Binky The Doormat
Footballguy
well, seems it's really back to 22 ...since @simey identified picks 21 and 22 as all part of the "Medley"
I need those three picks man.
Zegras11
Footballguy
Gr00vus
Footballguy
Love it. The counting at the start, the cough, the crazy McCartney guitar solos, the muted cowbell, the seemingly spasmodic but actually cooly semi-syncopated tambourine accents, laughing at specific members of the government, "declare the pennies on your eyes", all of it. So good.
Last edited by a moderator:
Binky The Doormat
Footballguy
Gr00vus
Footballguy
Yes, I really only like those 3 particular parts of the medley (I listed you never give me your money separately since it isn't contiguous with the other two), so I called them out specifically. Maybe those should take up 3 of my slots rather than 2.
krista4
Footballguy
krista4
Footballguy
In OH (ex-Mr. krista)'s top 10.
It's up to you, but I'd really rather not. I'd like us all to be working from the same list. On this list, the Medley is one song. If you hate parts of it, then it drops in your rankings or whatever. I don't think it's fair to the Medley to have parts of it competing against each other. :(
krista4
Footballguy
I'd prefer not to have the individual songs ranked separately. But if you're going to do it, I can't see the logic for grouping two of them together but not the others.
krista4
Footballguy
Reading landrys post right after Uruk's had me
It's like he has a notification setting of "snipe Uruk."
krista4
Footballguy
I've made my case on the medley here and elsewhere, but I'm not going to put a bunch of rules around this, so if you guys end up doing that on your lists, it's OK. You'll just end up with songs that aren't going to be ranked well since most will rank the medley as a whole.
Also, feel free to talk about Stevie Wonder and Led Zeppelin and Denny's in this thread.
Also, feel free to talk about Stevie Wonder and Led Zeppelin and Denny's in this thread.
DA RAIDERS
Footballguy
krista4
Footballguy
Regarding the Beatles setting themselves apart as "the greatest," I read this top ten reasons list on a Beatles-related Facebook page yesterday ( 
) (no I really don't read much there) and thought it was a good discussion piece. Might as well break it out now while we don't have a lot of other stuff to talk about yet. I don't agree with all of it, but am right there with the poster on some of it, especially #5. 
1. They had a unrivalled sense of humour compared to any other band I’ve ever seen or heard of. They could have been a 4-man scouser Marx Brothers if they had put their minds to it!
2. The Beatles had a work ethic unlike any other band in history. Not just the 8 hour Kaiserkeller sets, nor often 2 gigs a night during their touring years. When they wrote, they clocked in and out with a ton of overtime. Anyone who’s worked in the music biz knows that this normally doesn’t happen, certainly not to that degree.
3. Musically they were generically way more open than their contemporaries. Take Clapton and Cream as an example. They were blues-obsessives, and as George would admit during the Get Back sessions, Eric was a more technically gifted player than him. However, George could inflect country styles and Indian sitar patterns into his playing. Clapton simply didn’t have that range. And Paul? Ha! There was no style he couldn’t make his own; not folk, English Music-Hall, kids music, reggae, hard rock. Music just poured out of him. As he himself said, he had way more musical DNA by his teens than most musicians in an entire lifetime. All credit to his dad Jim here.
4. They could individually swap instruments with ease according to what was needed for the song. Paul shifts to piano, John to bass, George to drums. Even Ringo could play piano! This enhances the songwriting process and always leads to a more interesting arrangement.
5. Ringo.
Without Ringo, the Beatles would only have been half the band they were. Think about it. How often do you get a drummer in a band with that much patience, calm, understanding etc?
I was astonished and impressed with his rock-solid temperament in Get Back. He was quietly adapting and arranging his drum part so that it was moulded perfectly to suit the song. So many drummers I’ve worked with want to put flashy fills in, almost as show-off moves. Ringo was the opposite. Also his style was unique. Without wanting to get too technical, he knew how to lay back BEHIND the beat and not ahead of it. Most drummers do the latter or desperately try and keep metronomical time. Ringo was different and his rhythmic feel defines their sound, probably more so than other musical element. Hats off to you Ringo (and I’m not just talking about hi-hats). He was SUCH a humble guy too. Watching him accompany Macca on boogie woogie piano during the Get Back sessions was such a joy to watch.
6. They never got old. By this I mean that every member was under 30 when they split up. Just let that sink in. They had achieved musical immortality at the point when most (including me) have barely worked out what they want to achieve in life, never mind actually carrying it though.
7. They were culturally unique yet loved across all generations. I was a child jazz pianist. I used to tour around jazz festivals in France from around 8-17 years old. I remember performing Beatles standards like Michelle, Obladi-oblada, Yesterday and Let It Be in restaurants, bars and bandstands. Like this: https://youtu.be/nrKnlOA-Lt0 The next day, I’d be wandering around town with my parents - and grandpas, aunts, dads, teens, young kids etc would come up to me and say ‘Le Petit Beatle!’ (The Little Beatle!). It felt great as an 8 year old kid - and it also made me realise that ALL generations loved them equally - not just rebellious teens. Suffice to say, whenever I see a piano and there are people around, I always start with Hey Jude, Let It Be or Yesterday. Always a winner .
8. They were ludicrously prolific. When one considers that they rehearsed, recorded and released Help, Rubber Soul, Revolver and Pepper all in just over two years, one realises that this is prolific writing on a par with the likes of Mozart - and that’s not hyperbole. It’s no coincidence that Mozart had also written most of his good stuff by the age of thirty too! The likes of Sheeran and Coldplay take roughly three years for every (very very mediocre) album…
9. The Beatles had three, not just one, genius songwriters in a band. Most bands are tremendously lucky to have just the one. These days, the art of popular music songwriting has become virtually lost and so diluted as to make it hardly the most important factor in an act’s eventual success. So much investment is put into so few artists these days that record companies can only rely on the most catchy hooks to justify the huge marketing budgets that they’re gambling on. So they have to play safe. I call it the ‘McDonalds’-isation of music. It’s become beyond commodified and beige, and we’ve sadly got to the point when no one even realises what we lost in the process.
10. Finally, The Beatles defined a decade that no artist has ever matched before or since. Western society transformed more radically and at a more breakneck pace between 1962 and 1969 than at any time in human history. Without The Beatles, this cultural shift would never have happened.
) (no I really don't read much there) and thought it was a good discussion piece. Might as well break it out now while we don't have a lot of other stuff to talk about yet. I don't agree with all of it, but am right there with the poster on some of it, especially #5. 1. They had a unrivalled sense of humour compared to any other band I’ve ever seen or heard of. They could have been a 4-man scouser Marx Brothers if they had put their minds to it!
2. The Beatles had a work ethic unlike any other band in history. Not just the 8 hour Kaiserkeller sets, nor often 2 gigs a night during their touring years. When they wrote, they clocked in and out with a ton of overtime. Anyone who’s worked in the music biz knows that this normally doesn’t happen, certainly not to that degree.
3. Musically they were generically way more open than their contemporaries. Take Clapton and Cream as an example. They were blues-obsessives, and as George would admit during the Get Back sessions, Eric was a more technically gifted player than him. However, George could inflect country styles and Indian sitar patterns into his playing. Clapton simply didn’t have that range. And Paul? Ha! There was no style he couldn’t make his own; not folk, English Music-Hall, kids music, reggae, hard rock. Music just poured out of him. As he himself said, he had way more musical DNA by his teens than most musicians in an entire lifetime. All credit to his dad Jim here.
4. They could individually swap instruments with ease according to what was needed for the song. Paul shifts to piano, John to bass, George to drums. Even Ringo could play piano! This enhances the songwriting process and always leads to a more interesting arrangement.
5. Ringo.
Without Ringo, the Beatles would only have been half the band they were. Think about it. How often do you get a drummer in a band with that much patience, calm, understanding etc?
I was astonished and impressed with his rock-solid temperament in Get Back. He was quietly adapting and arranging his drum part so that it was moulded perfectly to suit the song. So many drummers I’ve worked with want to put flashy fills in, almost as show-off moves. Ringo was the opposite. Also his style was unique. Without wanting to get too technical, he knew how to lay back BEHIND the beat and not ahead of it. Most drummers do the latter or desperately try and keep metronomical time. Ringo was different and his rhythmic feel defines their sound, probably more so than other musical element. Hats off to you Ringo (and I’m not just talking about hi-hats). He was SUCH a humble guy too. Watching him accompany Macca on boogie woogie piano during the Get Back sessions was such a joy to watch.
6. They never got old. By this I mean that every member was under 30 when they split up. Just let that sink in. They had achieved musical immortality at the point when most (including me) have barely worked out what they want to achieve in life, never mind actually carrying it though.
7. They were culturally unique yet loved across all generations. I was a child jazz pianist. I used to tour around jazz festivals in France from around 8-17 years old. I remember performing Beatles standards like Michelle, Obladi-oblada, Yesterday and Let It Be in restaurants, bars and bandstands. Like this: https://youtu.be/nrKnlOA-Lt0 The next day, I’d be wandering around town with my parents - and grandpas, aunts, dads, teens, young kids etc would come up to me and say ‘Le Petit Beatle!’ (The Little Beatle!). It felt great as an 8 year old kid - and it also made me realise that ALL generations loved them equally - not just rebellious teens. Suffice to say, whenever I see a piano and there are people around, I always start with Hey Jude, Let It Be or Yesterday. Always a winner .
8. They were ludicrously prolific. When one considers that they rehearsed, recorded and released Help, Rubber Soul, Revolver and Pepper all in just over two years, one realises that this is prolific writing on a par with the likes of Mozart - and that’s not hyperbole. It’s no coincidence that Mozart had also written most of his good stuff by the age of thirty too! The likes of Sheeran and Coldplay take roughly three years for every (very very mediocre) album…
9. The Beatles had three, not just one, genius songwriters in a band. Most bands are tremendously lucky to have just the one. These days, the art of popular music songwriting has become virtually lost and so diluted as to make it hardly the most important factor in an act’s eventual success. So much investment is put into so few artists these days that record companies can only rely on the most catchy hooks to justify the huge marketing budgets that they’re gambling on. So they have to play safe. I call it the ‘McDonalds’-isation of music. It’s become beyond commodified and beige, and we’ve sadly got to the point when no one even realises what we lost in the process.
10. Finally, The Beatles defined a decade that no artist has ever matched before or since. Western society transformed more radically and at a more breakneck pace between 1962 and 1969 than at any time in human history. Without The Beatles, this cultural shift would never have happened.
krista4
Footballguy
Shhhhh, I'm just going to incorporate it into my write-ups and claim it as my own. No one will know.
Binky The Doormat
Footballguy
Pip's Invitation
Footballguy
PIK95
Footballguy
My top one is always my one, then the next two are a tier, then the next twenty are the way I want them. My 24 and 25 could change possibly.DaVinci said:My top 5 is solid. There's about 30 songs that could be #6.
She Loves You is such a giant tune. It's a total punk precursor imo. The big drums, the pace, and the SHE SAYS SHE LOVES YOU aggressiveness. Almost a perfect tune with the harmonies. And that was what, 1963? Wow.
Edited to add, my mom would have been one of those thirteen year old screaming girls around that time which is amazing to me. So they couldn't get TOTALLY punk with that base. Especially when you look at the music just five years earlier. Crazy.
Last edited by a moderator:
wikkidpissah
Footballguy
i like this postkrista4 said:Regarding the Beatles setting themselves apart as "the greatest," I read this top ten reasons list on a Beatles-related Facebook page yesterday (
1. They had a unrivalled sense of humour compared to any other band I’ve ever seen or heard of. They could have been a 4-man scouser Marx Brothers if they had put their minds to it!
2. The Beatles had a work ethic unlike any other band in history. Not just the 8 hour Kaiserkeller sets, nor often 2 gigs a night during their touring years. When they wrote, they clocked in and out with a ton of overtime. Anyone who’s worked in the music biz knows that this normally doesn’t happen, certainly not to that degree.
3. Musically they were generically way more open than their contemporaries. Take Clapton and Cream as an example. They were blues-obsessives, and as George would admit during the Get Back sessions, Eric was a more technically gifted player than him. However, George could inflect country styles and Indian sitar patterns into his playing. Clapton simply didn’t have that range. And Paul? Ha! There was no style he couldn’t make his own; not folk, English Music-Hall, kids music, reggae, hard rock. Music just poured out of him. As he himself said, he had way more musical DNA by his teens than most musicians in an entire lifetime. All credit to his dad Jim here.
4. They could individually swap instruments with ease according to what was needed for the song. Paul shifts to piano, John to bass, George to drums. Even Ringo could play piano! This enhances the songwriting process and always leads to a more interesting arrangement.
5. Ringo.
Without Ringo, the Beatles would only have been half the band they were. Think about it. How often do you get a drummer in a band with that much patience, calm, understanding etc?
I was astonished and impressed with his rock-solid temperament in Get Back. He was quietly adapting and arranging his drum part so that it was moulded perfectly to suit the song. So many drummers I’ve worked with want to put flashy fills in, almost as show-off moves. Ringo was the opposite. Also his style was unique. Without wanting to get too technical, he knew how to lay back BEHIND the beat and not ahead of it. Most drummers do the latter or desperately try and keep metronomical time. Ringo was different and his rhythmic feel defines their sound, probably more so than other musical element. Hats off to you Ringo (and I’m not just talking about hi-hats). He was SUCH a humble guy too. Watching him accompany Macca on boogie woogie piano during the Get Back sessions was such a joy to watch.
6. They never got old. By this I mean that every member was under 30 when they split up. Just let that sink in. They had achieved musical immortality at the point when most (including me) have barely worked out what they want to achieve in life, never mind actually carrying it though.
7. They were culturally unique yet loved across all generations. I was a child jazz pianist. I used to tour around jazz festivals in France from around 8-17 years old. I remember performing Beatles standards like Michelle, Obladi-oblada, Yesterday and Let It Be in restaurants, bars and bandstands. Like this: https://youtu.be/nrKnlOA-Lt0 The next day, I’d be wandering around town with my parents - and grandpas, aunts, dads, teens, young kids etc would come up to me and say ‘Le Petit Beatle!’ (The Little Beatle!). It felt great as an 8 year old kid - and it also made me realise that ALL generations loved them equally - not just rebellious teens. Suffice to say, whenever I see a piano and there are people around, I always start with Hey Jude, Let It Be or Yesterday. Always a winner .
8. They were ludicrously prolific. When one considers that they rehearsed, recorded and released Help, Rubber Soul, Revolver and Pepper all in just over two years, one realises that this is prolific writing on a par with the likes of Mozart - and that’s not hyperbole. It’s no coincidence that Mozart had also written most of his good stuff by the age of thirty too! The likes of Sheeran and Coldplay take roughly three years for every (very very mediocre) album…
9. The Beatles had three, not just one, genius songwriters in a band. Most bands are tremendously lucky to have just the one. These days, the art of popular music songwriting has become virtually lost and so diluted as to make it hardly the most important factor in an act’s eventual success. So much investment is put into so few artists these days that record companies can only rely on the most catchy hooks to justify the huge marketing budgets that they’re gambling on. So they have to play safe. I call it the ‘McDonalds’-isation of music. It’s become beyond commodified and beige, and we’ve sadly got to the point when no one even realises what we lost in the process.
10. Finally, The Beatles defined a decade that no artist has ever matched before or since. Western society transformed more radically and at a more breakneck pace between 1962 and 1969 than at any time in human history. Without The Beatles, this cultural shift would never have happened.
wikkidpissah
Footballguy
krista4 said:
i'm such a peep, but the highlite of my online day is watching the daily vid from the Clark family (first famous as the Quarantine Kids - a locked-down club singer who starting recording covers of his favorites in his family room with his 9&11yo sons & 7yo daughter). the reason i mention it is that the 9yo drummer just absolutely lights up when they do a Beatles song, cuz that's when he gets to be brilliantly synchopacious. it's like a RINGO SHOWCASE!!
Last edited by a moderator:
AAABatteries
Footballguy
I know I'm talking to the experts so nothing ground breaking here but to also highlight The Beatles GOAT-ness
I think you could somewhat easily create a top-25 of just singles and ignore the albums completely.
I think you could somewhat easily create a top-25 of just singles and ignore the albums completely.
Guido Merkins
Footballguy
And vice versa.....In My Life, A Day In The Life, Medley, Here Comes the Sun....not singles
ScottNorwood
Footballcutie
The Beatles documentary was boring. I didn't make it past the 20 minute mark.
Don't @ me bros.
Don't @ me bros.
Zegras11
Footballguy
Missed it. Wide right.
First hour was pretty slow. Last five hours pretty awesome
Shaft41
Footballguy
So, revisiting my top 25 is simultaneously making me more and less happy than Mal Evans with an anvil. I love listening to these songs, like I always do, but the process of picking and ordering and repicking and reordering is maddening. I currently have 38, but I need to go through them again because I'm thinking I've missed a few. And I make no apologies for some of the ones one my list, and some of the chalk I leave out. The last three years has completely solidified where my sweet spot for the Beatles is, era-wise, and that's where the majority of my selections will come from.
AAABatteries
Footballguy
I went in to details about my process for coming up with my list for the LZ thread. I'm doing the same process here. Basically doing rounds of review. I will definitely have a couple more rounds for this list due to the sheer volume of songs. Round 1 I queue up every song and listen to either a portion of it or all of it. I put them in to In, Out, and Review groupings and continue in that fashion until I get to around 35 songs. Some songs go straight to the 35, most get reviewed while I whittle it down. Then I establish my last 10 out and finally rank the 25.
I expect this whole process to be more difficult here - part of that is due to the length of songs. The Beatles have countless 2-3 minute masterpieces. Picking between those will be difficult.
krista4
Footballguy
I was prepared to hate this, as I do all such videos, but I loved it. That tribute to Ringo was incredible! The kid can even do the deep cuts. Delightful.
Similar threads
