Is this A Sad Sign for Rock & Roll? The Band of the Decade (2000-2009): The Beatles?! - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

Brian Damage · 01-03-2010, 02:22 PM

What does it say that the biggest musical group of the first decade of this new millennium recorded its last album 40 years ago?

That's what sales figures show, that the best-selling album of the decade is the Beatles' 1, a collection of their number one hits. And that, when counting the individual albums in their massive (and very expensive) box sets of remastered recordings released just this past September as individual albums rather than one "unit," the erstwhile lads from Liverpool have sold more CDs than Eminem, the leading solo act of the decade, or any group, for that matter.

That's what the figures show.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/willia..._b_409217.html

MickeyMac · 01-03-2010, 03:22 PM

So why is this a sad thing????

The Beatles are the biggest band ever, and their music is liked by people of all walks of life.

I ask again why is this sad??

A good band is a good band regardless of what era they are from.

dakert · 01-03-2010, 04:37 PM

[QUOTE=MickeyMac]So why is this a sad thing????

Its a sad thing because there is nothing to look forward to. I am sure when The Rolling Stones tour again it will be the highest grossing concert

20 year old Taylor Swift getting 8 Grammy nominations??

phoebe7165 · 01-03-2010, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MickeyMac

So why is this a sad thing????

The Beatles are the biggest band ever, and their music is liked by people of all walks of life.

I ask again why is this sad??

A good band is a good band regardless of what era they are from.

It's not really a sad thing. I think what Brian's point is that alot of music these days has gone down to where a band who hasn't been together for years, especially this past decade, is still the Band of THIS Decade.

phoebe7165 · 01-03-2010, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dakert

So why is this a sad thing????

Its a sad thing because there is nothing to look forward to. I am sure when The Rolling Stones tour again it will be the highest grossing concert

Absolutely, I much rather see a classic band(not just the Stones, either) in concert than one of the newer acts out there now.

Quote:

20 year old Taylor Swift getting 8 Grammy nominations??

Not really a fan of Taylor's. I've gotten so out of the Grammys and the AMAs. Just not interested in alot of "their" music anymore.

ABlairican Pie · 01-03-2010, 09:25 PM

What bands or performers would we say best indicated the 2000's? I think of edgy metal bands such as Slipknot, System Of a Down, Lamb of God, etc. It's strange, probably because this past decade has not been the best for music. The reason is because the music industry has had so many problems with such things as internet downloading, and the fact that the radio industry has played it safe with promoting new bands. They've had to stick with a tried-and-true formula and not push the envelope too much. And notice how everything "rock" has had to sound like Nickelback, or what they call "post-grunge"?

Brian Damage · 01-03-2010, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MickeyMac

So why is this a sad thing????

The Beatles are the biggest band ever, and their music is liked by people of all walks of life.

I ask again why is this sad??

A good band is a good band regardless of what era they are from.

I actually enjoy the Beatles music, but like everyone else has stated, it is sad when a band from the 60's is outselling today's bands. It doesn't give me much hope for the way this industry is going.

JT · 01-03-2010, 09:44 PM

Eh, everyone knows I think The Beatles are overrated. IMO, they wrote some great songs, but their singing voices are horrendous.

If I had to pick someone to define popular music of 2000-2009, I'd say someone like Beyonce. Since she's gone solo, there's really been no end to her success and talent.

MickeyMac · 01-04-2010, 03:30 PM

Here is a band for yall to check out

The Reiging Sound. They are based out of Memphis/North Carolina and are probably one of the best new bands I have seen in quite a while. You wont see them on MTV/VH1 or hear them on top 40 radio because they are not a mainstream band, but they rock just the same.

The same can be said about The Love Me Nots and the Cocktail Slippers.

By the way I dont think Beatles are overrated. Look what they accomplished. They still have more number one songs than anybody, they still sell records and sell records to people who werent even alive when they were around, and in one week in April 1964 they had the top five songs on the charts. Nobody before or since has done that.
Just saying

My own taste is I like the Beatles but I would take The Kinks, The Beach Boys and the Rolling Stones over them anyday

JT · 01-05-2010, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MickeyMac

Beatles are overrated. Look what they accomplished. They still have more number one songs than anybody, they still sell records and sell records to people who werent even alive when they were around, and in one week in April 1964 they had the top five songs on the charts. Nobody before or since has done that.
Just saying

I can understand that and appreciate their accomplishments, but I just can't listen to them too long at all. I used to work in a store that sold Rock Band, and when The Beatles edition came out, the store put like...20 songs of theirs into rotation on the radio, and I got so tired of it so quickly.

MickeyMac · 01-05-2010, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JT

I can understand that and appreciate their accomplishments, but I just can't listen to them too long at all. I used to work in a store that sold Rock Band, and when The Beatles edition came out, the store put like...20 songs of theirs into rotation on the radio, and I got so tired of it so quickly.

What do you like then????

JT · 01-05-2010, 10:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MickeyMac

What do you like then????

I like a wide variety, really. My iTunes is a really, really weird thing...I have No Doubt sitting right next to First Choice, and further down, there's a string of Carole King, 3 Doors Down, Tanya Tucker, and the Bee Gees. I have Barry Manilow next to Tyrone Davis, and Teddy Pendergrass next to Britney Spears.

I can deal with some Beatles stuff, but like I said, I really just appreciate their songwriting contributions. I can listen to other people cover their songs all day for some reason.

*Pleasant Tomorrow* · 01-05-2010, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ABlairican Pie

And notice how everything "rock" has had to sound like Nickelback, or what they call "post-grunge"?

Ugh, agreed! It's so true. I really cannot stand that same old sound of "rock" anymore. It's just a generic, boring sound to me. I mean I won't lie and say I don't enjoy some of that music, but as far as rock today is concerned...that's ALL there is.

I really have high hopes for this next decade. Maybe I'm just being optimistic but I sure hope things change.

MrCleveland · 01-06-2010, 06:52 PM

Let's see...The Beatles or Kanye West...The Beatles or Kanye West...

The Beatles, hands-down.

Let's see what Kanye would say...

"Yo, Beatles...I'm really happy for you, I'll let you finish...but The Rolling Stones are the best band of the decade. One of the best bands of the decade!"

01-03-2010, 02:22 PM	#1
Brian Damage I'm Rich Bitch Forum Icon Join Date: Feb 03, 2002 Location: What Ain't No Country I Ever Heard Of...They Speak English in What? Posts: 63,107	Is this A Sad Sign for Rock & Roll? The Band of the Decade (2000-2009): The Beatles?! What does it say that the biggest musical group of the first decade of this new millennium recorded its last album 40 years ago? That's what sales figures show, that the best-selling album of the decade is the Beatles' 1, a collection of their number one hits. And that, when counting the individual albums in their massive (and very expensive) box sets of remastered recordings released just this past September as individual albums rather than one "unit," the erstwhile lads from Liverpool have sold more CDs than Eminem, the leading solo act of the decade, or any group, for that matter. That's what the figures show. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/willia..._b_409217.html Attached Images
	__________________ The Key to the Kingdom of Heaven: John 3:3 *Money Doesn't Buy Happiness...But I'd Rather Cry in My Private Jet*

01-03-2010, 09:25 PM	#6
ABlairican Pie Member Forum Superstar Join Date: Dec 12, 2001 Location: Living where cats reign more Supreme than a pizza. Posts: 31,620	What bands or performers would we say best indicated the 2000's? I think of edgy metal bands such as Slipknot, System Of a Down, Lamb of God, etc. It's strange, probably because this past decade has not been the best for music. The reason is because the music industry has had so many problems with such things as internet downloading, and the fact that the radio industry has played it safe with promoting new bands. They've had to stick with a tried-and-true formula and not push the envelope too much. And notice how everything "rock" has had to sound like Nickelback, or what they call "post-grunge"?
	__________________ Release the kitties. --Nathan Explosion Last edited by ABlairican Pie; 01-03-2010 at 10:32 PM.

01-03-2010, 09:44 PM	#8
JT Member Forum Veteran Join Date: Apr 29, 2001 Location: USA Posts: 7,223	Eh, everyone knows I think The Beatles are overrated. IMO, they wrote some great songs, but their singing voices are horrendous. If I had to pick someone to define popular music of 2000-2009, I'd say someone like Beyonce. Since she's gone solo, there's really been no end to her success and talent.
	__________________ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrEbJBFWIPk

01-06-2010, 06:52 PM	#14
MrCleveland Drew Carey from Hell Forum Star Join Date: Nov 10, 2007 Location: The City of Cleveland, in The State of Cleveland, in The United States of Cleveland Posts: 14,228	Let's see...The Beatles or Kanye West...The Beatles or Kanye West... The Beatles, hands-down. Let's see what Kanye would say... "Yo, Beatles...I'm really happy for you, I'll let you finish...but The Rolling Stones are the best band of the decade. One of the best bands of the decade!"
	__________________ Thank God for kids that love Obscure Things. Lee Hazlewood (1929-2007) You ARE Special to God! Rev. Ernest Angely (August 1921-May 2021)

01-03-2010, 03:22 PM	#2
MickeyMac Member Forum Star Join Date: Jun 18, 2008 Location: Kalamazoo, Michigan Posts: 19,006	So why is this a sad thing???? The Beatles are the biggest band ever, and their music is liked by people of all walks of life. I ask again why is this sad?? A good band is a good band regardless of what era they are from.

01-03-2010, 04:37 PM	#3
dakert Member Forum 3000 Club Member Join Date: May 10, 2007 Location: Altoona PA Posts: 3,411	[QUOTE=MickeyMac]So why is this a sad thing???? Its a sad thing because there is nothing to look forward to. I am sure when The Rolling Stones tour again it will be the highest grossing concert 20 year old Taylor Swift getting 8 Grammy nominations??

01-04-2010, 03:30 PM	#9
MickeyMac Member Forum Star Join Date: Jun 18, 2008 Location: Kalamazoo, Michigan Posts: 19,006	Here is a band for yall to check out The Reiging Sound. They are based out of Memphis/North Carolina and are probably one of the best new bands I have seen in quite a while. You wont see them on MTV/VH1 or hear them on top 40 radio because they are not a mainstream band, but they rock just the same. The same can be said about The Love Me Nots and the Cocktail Slippers. By the way I dont think Beatles are overrated. Look what they accomplished. They still have more number one songs than anybody, they still sell records and sell records to people who werent even alive when they were around, and in one week in April 1964 they had the top five songs on the charts. Nobody before or since has done that. Just saying My own taste is I like the Beatles but I would take The Kinks, The Beach Boys and the Rolling Stones over them anyday