Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[fanofthefab4]

   There is an unfortunately now popular anti-Beatles music critic Piero Scaruffi and The New York Times had an article on him in The Arts section from October 2006 and the guy who wriote it Dan Morrell calls Scaruffi's web site The Greatest Web Site Ever! Scaruffi is also cognitive scientist and poet and the author of a volume called The History of Rock Music that has sold over 1,000 copies,and where he says the same ignorant inaccurate garbage about The Beatles,  and he has a huge music web site and  he has an irrational thing against The Beatles!  He really is one of these unreasonable people who is really mad about the fact that the group that he doesn't like(which I just can't understand!)  instead of his favorite groups is the most popular and critically acclaimed!  He says totally ignorant inaccurate garbage about The Beatles that is not an issue of just an opinion, there is *plenty* of  proof and examples from The Beatles recording engineers to debunk his ridiculous claims!  The wikipedia free online encyclopedia says that his reviews are conterversial and most rock critics around the world disagree  with what he says about The Beatles.  I emailed him back in the Fall of 2001  when I first found his site while looking for reviews of The Beatles. He wrote me back 3 different ignorant responses and then I just gave up and didn't answer him back. I couldn't argue with an ignoramus anymore. He actually  says such inaccurate ridiculous things as The Beatles never did anything of creative depth and never were musically innovative!  He also calls them 4 mediocre musicians who only became popular because of George Martin and Brian Epstein's great marketing!   Really whatever happened to the one hit wonders and the true artifical pop groups who had great marketing but are not the most critically acclaimed and popular rock group ever like they are!


He also says that no other musicians spoke highly of The Beatles and couldn't really understand why they were held in such high regard. This is totally untrue!  Jimi Hendrix played Day Tripper Live,and he also played Sgt.Pepper live in concert only 2 days after it came out,Bob Dylan said The Beatles chords were so ourageous and that they were doing things even in their early career that was never done before and that their great melodies and harmonies made it all valid,The Rolling Stones were good friends with The Beatles and big fans of them too,and Mick Jagger was t 4 Beatles recording sessions and Keith Richards was at 2 of them with him! The Beatles also wrote one of The Rolling Stones first real hits with the song,I Wann Be You're Man in early 1964. Brian Wilson says he was blown away by how brilliant Rubber Soul was,and this motivated him to make Pet Sounds and called John and Paul the 2 greatest song writers of the 20th century,Ozzy Osbourne has been a huge Beatles fan since he was a teenager,and he said in a 2002 online Bender Magazine interview that The Beatles Are The Greatest Band To Ever Walk The Earth! He also says not loving The Beatles is like not loving oxogen. Eric Clapton said John was a very good guitar player,and he would have known since he played live in concert with John as a member of his 1969 John Lennon Plastic Ono Band. Eric also called George Harrison a fantastic slide guitar player when he and George were interviewed during a 1992 tour of Japan together and were asked what they admired about each other. There is also an excellent web site,The Evolution of Rock Bass Playing McCartney Style by Denis Alstrand. in it Stanley Clarke,Will Lee,Billy Sheehan and Sting all say what a great,melodic and influential bass player Paul has always been! The 1992 Rolling Stone Album Guide also says Paul is a remarkable bass player as well as calling John and Paul the greatest song writers in the history of rock. The All Music Guide also  says these things about them as well as nd says that John and Paul were also among the best and most expressive singers in rock.In the Fall of 2001  I emailed Andre Gardner about this guy and his web site.  Andre is the huge Beatles fan expert rock radio DJ who has been hosting Breakfast With The Beatles on my local classic rock station for years, he looked up his site and emailed me back and said this bozo gave higher ratings to The Fugs than The Beatles! I never even heard of The Fugs.


 He actually told me in one of the emails that I was the most intelligent Beatles fan he ever communicated with because I didn't bring up how many records The Beatles sold and try to use this as an example of  why they were great. He claimed he wanted some real solid information to make the case about why they were great not just record sales,so I gave it to him,I suggested he read the excellent thorough book,The Beatles Recording Sessions by Mark Lewisohn. Which is a very thorough detailed music diary of their remarkable 8 year recording career.  I told him that all of their recording engineers are interviewed in this book such as Geoff Emerick,Norman Smith who went on to work with Pink Floyd,Ken Scott who went on to work with David Bowie,and Alan Parsons a highly impressed Beatles fan was one of their recording engineers on their last 2 albums,Abbey Road and Let it Be. They all describe in details how truly innovative,creative and inventive especially John and Paul were in the recording studio. But this *still* didn't get through to him! He actually is a Doors fan though,they were good but they didn't even have a bass player and I read on some message boards people saying they think The Doors are overrated  pretentious crap and that they were not great musicians!


Also there are many  good music professors teaching courses on The Beatles at good universities. One of them is award winning music  professor and composer Dr.Glen Gass at Indiana University. He's been teaching a course on rock music and a Beatles course since 1982. On his web site for his course it says the main purpose of this course is to get students to have a better appreciation of this amazing group and their extraordinary recordings. Dr.Gary Kendal's Beatles course is the most requested at North Western University and there is also a Beatles course taught at The University of California. A music professor with the last name of Heinonen  at JYVASKYLA university in Finland  also teaches a Beatles course. Also The Beatles are # 1 on acclaimed music .net which combines all of the different rock music critics reviews from decades!

[Bobber]

Never heard of the guy.

[fanofthefab4]

Well I'm glad you didn't hear of him because he deserves not be heard of!  But on this web site called   Listology, there are quite a few posters on there that follow him and  quote him almost verbatim like they are brainwashed members of his cult or something.  A few even claimed to be Beatles fans before. It's really scary how they say how they totally trust and rely on his music "opinions" and  say they think he's right about most things he says!  But as the wikipedia says most rock critics worldwide disagree with the crap he says about The Beatles. The Beatles are rightfully the # 1 acclaimed music artists on acclaimedmusic.net which combines all of the rock music reviews done by many different rock critics over decades!

[Bobber]

As a wise man once said: 'Don't Follow Leaders'.

There have been Beatlesfans and -haters ever since the early days. It is quite easy to critize what other people have achieved. It seems that the guy is neglected by most of his collegues and therefore will be no more than a footnote in history. Speaking of history: The Beatles themselves have proven him to be wrong. I'd say it's nothing to be worried about.

[fanofthefab4]

Thank you bobber! But I wouldn't say he's ignored by  others please look up his site and read his review of The Beatles and look up The New York Times article by Dan Forrell  called The Greatest Web Site Ever about Scaruffi and his music site. It's very obvious to me  as I said, that he is the type of person that is really mad that  his favorite groups are not the most critically acclaimed and the most popular,so he resents The Beatles because they are and so he has this inaccurate irrational thing against them. I have found over 40 former Beatles haters on message boards and other web sites who are now big Beatles fans. I didn't communicate with them. But they say they had ignorant misperceptions about them and hadn't even heard most of their songs and albums. Now,most people don't hate The Beatles to begin with and most people of all ages love or at least like their music worldwide. But most people don't go from hating a group to becoming big fans,and this just goes to show how great The Beatles are! But what really gets me is the total inaccurate ignorant crap Scaruffi says about them! When I *know* it's not accurate!

[The End]

Thanks for the info

I agree, it is REALLY annoying when someone spouts off without even bothering to learn the facts. I think that even most non-fans appreciate the importance and impact of the group though, if grudgingly!

These sorts of people thrive on attention - the attention he gets from his "followers" and from fans who complain about him! He is after a reaction - don't give him the satisfaction!

I'm pretty sure someone has posted on here about him before and the same advice was provided then too: ignore him. I did, and I didn't even remember his name when you mentioned him in your post! So it works!

[zipp]

Does Scaruffi want us to burn their records?

[The End]

Does Scaruffi want us to burn their records?

LOL!!!!

[Kevin]

I don't mind a bit of debate - it's nice change from people discounting their importance simply because they don't like the music. I think it's important we don't became like the church and ostracize people jusy because they don't agree with us. I think we should be comfortable that with the strength of our case we can batter him down on any point he cares to raise.

[raxo]

[...] I think we should be comfortable that with the strength of our case we can batter him down on any point he cares to raise.

Need we say anything else?

[fanofthefab4]

Does Scaruffi want us to burn their records?

I have a better idea,why don't we burn his web site and his "book"

 

[fanofthefab4]

I don't mind a bit of debate - it's nice change from people discounting their importance simply because they don't like the music. I think it's important we don't became like the church and ostracize people jusy because they don't agree with us. I think we should be comfortable that with the strength of our case we can batter him down on any point he cares to raise.

Well even though I will never really understand how anyone doesn't like at least some Beatles music since they made all different syles and did it so well, this is not  really mostly an issue of him just not liking The Beatles music, it's as I said the total inaccurate bullsh*t he says about them as if  it were true and correct when I have provided  a lot of facts to correct and debunk him! This is like the same ignorant crap that some young people are saying calling The Beatles a "boy" band and comparing them to true artificial manufactured boy bands like NYSYNC and The Backstreet Boys!


 Also, as early as 1963 music critics were seriously studying The Beatles music, and music critic  William Mann of The  London Times  pointed out the unusual and interesting chords they used even in early songs like She Loves You and I Want To Hold Your Hand and that they used clever sublties in their music,and that these songs are not as  simple as they seem even though their middle and later music was more innovative and complex. Bob Dylan also said that even in songs I Want To Hold Your Hand and She Loves You their chords were outrageous and that they were doing things that nobody had done before and their melodies and harmonies made it all valid. And also  in December 1963 a music critic Richard Buckle of  The Sunday  London Times called John and Paul the 2 greatest composers since Beethoven after reviewing the music they composed for a ballet called Mods and Rockers. At that time it was very unheard of and unusual for any music critic to compare young rock artists with Beethoven! It's still not that common today! I mean John and Paul were incredible, as early as 1963 when they were just staring to write *their* hits,they were also writing hit songs for other music artists!  


The Beatles producer George Martin is a very talented guy himself and he a classicaly trained musician who studied at the Guildhall School of Music as a teenager. He has produced many music artists since The Beatles, but he still  says he has never worked with anyone as brilliant as The Beatles!

[Kevin]

All excellent points.
But if I was PS and in an arguementative mood I would argue:
1.William Mann's essay is generally regarded as pretenscious claptrap and was widely derided at the time (including by The Beatles) and did not reflect any type of acceptance by the musical establishment.  Also that his critic is famous for being unique, rather than reflecting any trend of serious study by music critics in 1963. And that The Times has a history of pandering to the youth movement (it was them that did the Butterfly on a wheel article and ran the legalise dope ads).*
2. Richard Buckle was a ballet, not music critic. The "specially composed" music was just a brief instrumental, otherwise it was a reworking of current Beatle music. Buckle was well known as a controversial figure, and besides, there is every liklehood that he was drunk at the time( ).
3. Dylan is also widely quoted as saying "turn that cr*p off" when hearing Sgt Pepper on the radio.
4. There are plenty of songfactory duos (Goffin King, Leiber Stoller) who knocked out hits by the bucketload.

* I'd probably also argue that besides, it's rock and roll we're talking about here, the music of rebellion for the new youth culture. Get away with your "Aeolian cadence" and your "melismas with altered vowels ." Save that for your yawn-inducing three album gatefold quazi-classical epics of the prog rockers.
In 1963 r'n'r was about sex (and all the better for it IMO.) It was supposed to rebel against their parents stuffy world, not mimic it. (ps this is an anti Mann, not anti Beatles rant.)

[fanofthefab4]

Kevin,

It's Scaruffi who doesn't really know what he's talking about!  Classical composer Leonard Bernstein also called John and Paul the 2  most brilliant song composers of the 20th century! And to say that Richard Buckle was probably drunk when he said that John and Paul were the 2 greatest song composers since Beethoven is ridiculous and Scaruffi would sound like *he's* drunk to come up with this and it sounds like you can't really be a true fan to say something like that! And there are no defenses for the crap he's saying so why try to make up ones that defend him?  And  the point is *MANY* other well known musicians *HAVE*  praised their music so it's  totally false what he's saying!  And it still was very unheard of and  considered outrageous for *any* music critics  to compare a 21 and 23 year old rock  compors to Beethoven and it still is today!  There were some comparing them to Schubert . How do you know that Richard Buckle was just a ballet critic,Hunter Davies the only authorized biographer of The Beatles doesn't say that he says he was a music critic for The London Sunday Times and that William Mann was a music critic for The London Times. . And besides it was a ballet John and Paul composed the music for. And the quote you used from Bob Dylan, doesn't take away from what he said about even their early music! He was friends with The Beatles and they had a mutual respect.  Many people have said that he went electric because of The Beatles. Just like he influenced their folk rock on their brilliant Rubber Soul album. If Bob Dylan said that I'm sure it was because he didn't like psychedelic music.

There have been plenty of good music scholars and critics who have written about,studied and praised their music.  Another example of Scaruffi's inaccurate bull in saying The Beatles never did anything innovative or of creative depth,is their recording engineer Geoff Emerick says that John was one of the first ones to own a melotron,and their tape operator Jerry Boys says that The Beatles used it in ways nobody had thought of before!  Do you really think that award winning music professors would be teaching courses on The Beatles at good universities if anything he's saying was valid?  Also Geoff Emerick explains in The Beatles Recording Sessions that in early 1966 George Harrison played backwards guitar the most difficult way possible even though he could have taken the easy way,and that it took him 6 hours just for the overdubs!  He then made it even more difficult by adding more distorted guitars. And Geoff says this was all George's idea and that he did all of the playing. George also would stay up until 2 in the morning at age 14 playing the guitar until he got the chords just  right and his fingers were bleeding!

Well whenever i hear someone who doesn't like the beatles for good reason, i just think 'hah, if only they knew what they're missing out on', so in other words, their the suckers really for not knowing how much pleasure (musical ) they can really get out of them..i'd give anything to re-discover the beatles again, knowing hardly any of their stuff. Thank god we've discovered them is what i say!

[Kevin]

I totally agree that what PS says about The Beatles not being innovative or creative is rubbish. I think The Beatles are head and shoulders the greatest band to have walked this earth. I don't think that at any point I said I agreed with what PS said (nor did I mean to imply that what you said was rubbish). I was playing devils advocate really, trying to think of some counter arguements that weren't based simply on personal taste.
Re Richard Buckle - all the bio's I read about him called him a ballet critic, so I took the plunge. The drunk thing was a joke (hence the smiley face) because they also mentioned his love of the drink. He was also a raging queen, and I was going to say he probably only liked the Beatles because of the "Epstein effect". And really, I don't see how composing music for a ballet ( a bit of a misnomer - it was only a brief instrumental) gives a rock and roll band any kudos. Kind of puts them in late Elton John territory.
I used the single Dylan quote to counter your own (that made it 1-1 and even stevens.) I totally agree that The Beatles had a huge influence on Dylan. Again, I was just arguing because it's fun, and to show it's easy to pull up individual facts and quotes that suit your own side.
But I stand by what I said about Mann. I think his little essay did more harm than good.
At the end of the day though we are very much on the same side. I think the difference is I welcome debates with people like Mr PS. It's why I joined a forum in the first place (how boring would it be if we just sat here all day agreeing with each other.)
All the power to you. Please don't take this too seriously. And welcome by the way.

[fanofthefab4]

I totally agree that what PS says about The Beatles not being innovative or creative is rubbish. I think The Beatles are head and shoulders the greatest band to have walked this earth. I don't think that at any point I said I agreed with what PS said (nor did I mean to imply that what you said was rubbish). I was playing devils advocate really, trying to think of some counter arguements that weren't based simply on personal taste.
Re Richard Buckle - all the bio's I read about him called him a ballet critic, so I took the plunge. The drunk thing was a joke (hence the smiley face) because they also mentioned his love of the drink. He was also a raging queen, and I was going to say he probably only liked the Beatles because of the "Epstein effect". And really, I don't see how composing music for a ballet ( a bit of a misnomer - it was only a brief instrumental) gives a rock and roll band any kudos. Kind of puts them in late Elton John territory.
I used the single Dylan quote to counter your own (that made it 1-1 and even stevens.) I totally agree that The Beatles had a huge influence on Dylan. Again, I was just arguing because it's fun, and to show it's easy to pull up individual facts and quotes that suit your own side.
But I stand by what I said about Mann. I think his little essay did more harm than good.
At the end of the day though we are very much on the same side. I think the difference is I welcome debates with people like Mr PS. It's why I joined a forum in the first place (how boring would it be if we just sat here all day agreeing with each other.)
All the power to you. Please don't take this too seriously. And welcome by the way.

But Kevin,I will say it again, what Scaruffi says are not  his "opinions" they are totally inaccurate and false!  Some things are just opinions but there is such a thing as facts  and  ignorant misperceptions and myths. I gave strong factual evidence that totally debunks the garbage he says. For example when he claims that no musicians of  The Beatles time praised them and couldn't understand why they were held in such high regard, it's totally untrue and I listed countless well known musicians and music artists that *have* prasied them and some even played on  their solo albums. Many as I wrote about in my orginal post have also praised them as musicians as well When Scaruffi says the stupid crap that The Beatles never did anything of creative depth and weren't  innovative, I gave an excellent source,The Beatles Recording Sesions by Mark Lewisohn that has many of their recording enginers and tape operators and they were *there*  describing in details how truly innovative,inventive and creative they  realy *were* !  So again,it's just not true what he says and  there isn't any other side here.  And the fact that John and Paul could write music for a ballet Mods and Rockers and also write great rock music just goes to show how diverse  and brilliantly  talented they were at *all* types of music. Scaruffi doesn't know what the he*  he's talking about!


 On a web site Historic Lists The Greatest Rock Groups and Guitarists of All Time, many people are saying The Beatles were the greatest rock band of all time. But there were  some idiots on here too saying really ignorant negative things about them. So, many people who know the facts  tried to correct them. One guy John says to  one of these ignoramuses, after he went into a lot of details about how innovative The Beatles really were,that this guy is like Beatles hater Piero Scaruffi,he's clueless and that if he doesn't like The Beatles fine(it's never fine or understandable with me though!) but at least get your facts straight before you post!  There was a 24 year old guy from Australia who said The Beatles are the greatest band ever and that they wrote so many great songs! A 16 year old guy also said he's only 16 and he knows The Beatles are the greatest band ever and he said anyone who doesn't think so should listen to Rubber Soul,Abbey Road Magical Mystery Tour The white album and see what a mistake they are making! I just read a post from a total moron on there now, who gets quotes from some other online article that claims The Beatles couldn't  sing they could only shout,and they were the worst group and musicians ever,and that they just stole things from other people! A guy George on there who says his favorite group is Led Zeppelin,says to this guy are you a joke? He went  on to  give many examples of  how innovative The Beatles were and said he could go on about The Beatles musical merits but he doesn't have time to write a book! He also mentions that  wikipedia the online encyclopedia explains The Beatles are the most critically acclaimed and best selling music groups and artist of all time! He said the recent issue of Q magazine says they are the most  essential rock artists of all time! Take that Scaruffi and anyone who listens to him!


Also as I said there have been plenty of other serious music scholars that have written about and praised The Beatles.

[mr kite]

If want to get huge publicity knock the biggest thing on the planet in music and away you go .If he was going to make a name for himself who would be better than the beatles.
Would any one care if his was decrediting the backstreet boys? no.
As ERIC CANTONA said "people who call you know you exsist".

[fanofthefab4]

  Mr.kite, you are *so* right! I have said it's very obvious that  Scaruffi  really hates the fact that  *his* favorite groups  and music artists are not the most critically acclaimed and the most popular,and since The Beatles are he resents them and he has this irational thing against them! I'm sure that  he would say the same garbage about any other group that he wasn't a fan of if they  were the most popular and  critically acclaimed! You know he even says that The Beatles (he means early Beatles) haircuts were  a lot like comedian Ish Kabibble's!  To even mention such a thing is so ridiculous and irrelevant!

[Bobber]

This was originally posted by fanofthefab4

On a site called ilXor.com,  they have a topic posted August 2006 ,Is There Anyone Here Who Genuinely  dislikes Or Hates The Beatles? And unfortunately someone  posts a highlighted link to that horrible  Piero Scaruffi's page and article he wrote about The Beatles!  There were quite a few agreeing with him and saying that he's right on the money about a lot of things. They quoted him saying that The Beatles "innovations" were just a watered down and coppied version of lesser known artists and Scaruffi's quotes that in Beatles songs there were no kids running in the streets,no politics,no drugs,no sex, and no violence.In the world of The Beatles the social order of the 40's and 50's still reigns,and he says at best they were influential on the secret deams of young girls and on the haircuts of young nerdy boys. Several posters pointed out Why Don't we Do it in The Road,and Happines is A Warm Gun for being Sex and drug songs.  But there are other Beatles sex and drugs songs, Day Tripper from late 1965 was about sex and drugs,Paul's Got To Get You Into My Life was an ode to pot, Dr.Robert was about a doctor who gave drugs to his patients, and A Day in The Life  with the verses I 'd Love To Turn You On were about LSD and Girl has John and Paul singing T*t over and over in the backround. John's Revolution was political too! A guy on this board this  Tim said Scaruffi's page about The Beatles is a horrah and he didn't want to read through this garbage again! He said they were a great rock group,and another guy said they were the most consistent pop/rock great writers ever.