The Beatles — Tomorrow Never Knows
Album: RevolverAvg rating:
Your rating:
Total ratings: 4522
Length: 2:51
Plays (last 30 days): 5
share
tweet
Turn off your mind
Relax and float down stream
It is not dying
It is not dying
Lay down all thought
Surrender to the void
It is shining
It is shining
That you may see
The meaning of within
It is being
It is being
That love is all
And love is everyone
It is knowing
It is knowing
That ignorance and hate
May mourn the dead
It is believing
It is believing
But listen to the
Colour of your dreams
It is not living
It is not living
Or play the game
Existence to the end
Of the beginning
Of the beginning
Of the beginning
Relax and float down stream
It is not dying
It is not dying
Lay down all thought
Surrender to the void
It is shining
It is shining
That you may see
The meaning of within
It is being
It is being
That love is all
And love is everyone
It is knowing
It is knowing
That ignorance and hate
May mourn the dead
It is believing
It is believing
But listen to the
Colour of your dreams
It is not living
It is not living
Or play the game
Existence to the end
Of the beginning
Of the beginning
Of the beginning
Comments (783)add comment
Not a Beatles fan but this is simply superb. Light years ahead of it's time...
Tylersmyler wrote:
Effing amazing. I speak from experience..
What did people think of this in '66 ?
Effing amazing. I speak from experience..
"I've got a song about an octopus!"🧔🐙
"Jam It Up your Arse... You're lucky we still let ya play DROOOMS!!"🧐
"Jam It Up your Arse... You're lucky we still let ya play DROOOMS!!"🧐
What did people think of this in '66 ?
CoYoT51 wrote:
YOU'RE NOT MY REAL MOM!
DON'T DO DRUGS!
YOU'RE NOT MY REAL MOM!
igotitmade2k wrote:
i love this. and the drums really get me in this one.
i love this. and the drums really get me in this one.
DON'T DO DRUGS!
agyurma wrote:
There are a few songs and albums that puzzle you like that as time passes. The Talking Heads' "Remain In Light" from 1980 is another.
Is this really from'66? Sounds like a timeless but fresh psychedelic song even from the future.
There are a few songs and albums that puzzle you like that as time passes. The Talking Heads' "Remain In Light" from 1980 is another.
Ate some mushrooms three weeks ago with two friends who just didn't get it. These lyrics are pretty much what I said to them for two hours ... relax, float ... surf the nausea ... listen to the color of your closed eyes ... Everything Is In Everything ...
Me? Enjoyed the trip and am ready to go again!
Me? Enjoyed the trip and am ready to go again!
Sometimes, when listening to this song, everything but the drums falls to the background.
sfoster66 wrote:
Acid
How the hell did these guys write this in 1966??
Acid
oh my god, I will neeeeeeeeeever tire of thisw track, absolute genuis stuff
hmmmmm...I wonder what influenced their musical trajectory, from the previous album to this one.
BCarn wrote:
Uh, no. That would be the Chemical Brothers sounding like the Beatles in this song.
801 covered this - live. Scoring a 10 from me.
Uh, no. That would be the Chemical Brothers sounding like the Beatles in this song.
801 covered this - live. Scoring a 10 from me.
How the hell did these guys write this in 1966??
My God, I hate the Beatles!
This was done on tape
amazing how timeless this is. groundbreaking at the time. Lennon could have just written this and Day in the Life and he'd be known for this (yeah, I know George, Paul and Ringo made significant contributions to these two songs).
Easily 50 years ahead of its time. Unbelievable
1966. Let that sink in.
Nineteen and sixty-six.
Nineteen and sixty-six.
jp33442 wrote:
If you don't like them, hit the SKIP BUTTON!! The majority of RP listeners LIKE THEM!!
Less beatles would be nicer
If you don't like them, hit the SKIP BUTTON!! The majority of RP listeners LIKE THEM!!
Best music. Everey time, I hear it, I wonder how good and modern it sounds and that, after all these years. So great, thank you for playing it. cosmiclint wrote:
Another thing I really like about RP is the wonderful suggestions on books, movies, etc. I'll have to get the kindle version, thanks!
I highly recommend Geoff Emerick's Here, There and Everywhere: My Life Recording the Music of the Beatles, which details his adventures as the Beatle's recording engineer, beginning with the recording of this song.
t0m5k1 wrote:
This sounds sooooo much like the chemical brothers it is amazing
BCarn wrote:
Uh, no. That would be the Chemical Brothers sounding like the Beatles in this song.
I'm starting to think that it's people's intense desire to display just how smart and knowledgeable they are that blinds them to the obvious facetiousness of posts like t0m5k1's. And over 40 other people give a thumbs up to that display of "knowledge" -- schooling poor, naïve ol' t0m5k1?
SMH
This sounds sooooo much like the chemical brothers it is amazing
BCarn wrote:
Uh, no. That would be the Chemical Brothers sounding like the Beatles in this song.
I'm starting to think that it's people's intense desire to display just how smart and knowledgeable they are that blinds them to the obvious facetiousness of posts like t0m5k1's. And over 40 other people give a thumbs up to that display of "knowledge" -- schooling poor, naïve ol' t0m5k1?
SMH
I highly recommend Geoff Emerick's Here, There and Everywhere: My Life Recording the Music of the Beatles, which details his adventures as the Beatle's recording engineer, beginning with the recording of this song.
it seems that tame impala was inspired by them... here's one more thing provides that how much impact the Beatles had on the next generation. I loved both of bands.
WilliDoc wrote:
What's more nuts is that I was 17 when I bought the album on its day of release...
Totally Cool!!
What's more nuts is that I was 17 when I bought the album on its day of release...
Totally Cool!!
scrubbrush wrote:
What's more nuts is that I was 17 when I bought the album on its day of release...
That song is 55 years old.
55.
that's nuts.
What's more nuts is that I was 17 when I bought the album on its day of release...
GODLIKE!
t0m5k1 wrote:
This sounds sooooo much like the chemical brothers it is amazing
BCarn wrote:
Uh, no. That would be the Chemical Brothers sounding like the Beatles in this song.
Another case where the usually astute RP listeners completely whiffed on seeing/understanding the facetious wit of a post. (At the time of my posting, 44 people apparently didn't get it.)
ziggytrix wrote:
Might I humbly request of the universe, and all those within who read English, that we simple cease and desist from referring to anything, especially people, as "overrated" or "underrated" or any combination of these terms? There may be isolated situation where these terms make sense, but Ringo is not one of those. Nor are pretty much all examples of this cliche-ridden terminology. Who, actually and after all, cares what or who rates anything or anyone? What is this all-encompassing rating system anyway? Give it all a rest, forever!
Ringo is easily the most underrated Beatle.
https://www.thefest.com/tomorr...
Might I humbly request of the universe, and all those within who read English, that we simple cease and desist from referring to anything, especially people, as "overrated" or "underrated" or any combination of these terms? There may be isolated situation where these terms make sense, but Ringo is not one of those. Nor are pretty much all examples of this cliche-ridden terminology. Who, actually and after all, cares what or who rates anything or anyone? What is this all-encompassing rating system anyway? Give it all a rest, forever!
ImaOldman wrote:
Don Draper ("Mad Men") didn't like it either.
More than 250 people rated this song a 5 or less, 79 of them rated it a 1. I didn't realize that many hearing impaired folks listened to RP...
Don Draper ("Mad Men") didn't like it either.
justin4kick wrote:
This sounds sooooo much like the chemical brothers it is amazing
And this is the top rated comment here?
Seems like quite a bunch of RP-listeners are missing the joke that t0m5ki made
No, they just "got it". Apparently you and Proclivities didn't.
This sounds sooooo much like the chemical brothers it is amazing
And this is the top rated comment here?
Seems like quite a bunch of RP-listeners are missing the joke that t0m5ki made
No, they just "got it". Apparently you and Proclivities didn't.
Proclivities wrote:
--whooosh!--
Not quite genius. But no fault of your own really. Dry humour passes by many.
--whooosh!--
Not quite genius. But no fault of your own really. Dry humour passes by many.
t0m5k1 wrote:
This sounds sooooo much like the chemical brothers it is amazing
BCarn wrote:
Uh, no. That would be the Chemical Brothers sounding like the Beatles in this song.
And this is the top rated comment here?
Seems like quite a bunch of RP-listeners are missing the joke that t0m5ki made
This sounds sooooo much like the chemical brothers it is amazing
BCarn wrote:
Uh, no. That would be the Chemical Brothers sounding like the Beatles in this song.
And this is the top rated comment here?
Seems like quite a bunch of RP-listeners are missing the joke that t0m5ki made
BCarn wrote:
Uh, no. That would be the Chemical Brothers sounding like the Beatles in this song.
--whooosh!--
Uh, no. That would be the Chemical Brothers sounding like the Beatles in this song.
--whooosh!--
ImaOldman wrote:
And despite that it has a rating of 8.3 so I think we can say those are statistically insignificant/definitely in the minority.
More than 250 people rated this song a 5 or less, 79 of them rated it a 1. I didn't realize that many hearing impaired folks listened to RP...
And despite that it has a rating of 8.3 so I think we can say those are statistically insignificant/definitely in the minority.
Los Lobos did a cover of this for a PBS special many years ago. It's on YouTube. Highly recommended.
That song is 55 years old.
55.
that's nuts.
55.
that's nuts.
Not a huge Beatles fan but Revolver and Rubber Soul sit well with me.
Godlike - The Beatles changed everything...
BCarn wrote:
Seek help. And that's Beatles with a capital B!
WTF should i???
Seek help. And that's Beatles with a capital B!
WTF should i???
Is this really from'66? Sounds like a timeless but fresh psychedelic song even from the future.
the luck of the draw. 3 of the last 4 songs here are from the Fabs. Tomorrow Never Knows, And I Love Her, We Can Work It Out.
imho, they are underplayed. just sayin'...
imho, they are underplayed. just sayin'...
I'll be honest. I don't enjoy most Beatles songs. I used to actively dislike the Beatles when I was young and now through the years of musical education, I can recognize how special they were/are.
This is one of the few Beatles songs I thought was amazing the first time I heard it. It is so out there.
This is one of the few Beatles songs I thought was amazing the first time I heard it. It is so out there.
Can we have a 3rd black and white cover in a row?
jp33442 wrote:
Seek help. And that's Beatles with a capital B!
Less beatles would be nicer
Seek help. And that's Beatles with a capital B!
What did I say! A few songs back it was a Tame Impala tune and I said it had a "Tomorrow Never Knows" vibe, and here's the song! Is someone listening in? Bill, is that you?!
LoudshirtsBand wrote:
Absolutely nailed it! Ringo may not have 'sounded' like a great drummer - maybe because of the simplicity? - but his keeping time was second to none; I'm no percussionist myself but know several drummers that reiterate this statement
I played drums in all sorts of bands... covered everything, from Iron Maiden to Jethro Tull, Billy Cobham to Pink Floyd, Santana, Deep Purple and many more... but, this guy... this guy is a headache. I started with great under-estimation of his drumming skills, continued with raised eyebrow, followed with frustration and pure hate and disgust for his ideas, and finally ended with genuine respect for this musician. Ringo is king-o!
Absolutely nailed it! Ringo may not have 'sounded' like a great drummer - maybe because of the simplicity? - but his keeping time was second to none; I'm no percussionist myself but know several drummers that reiterate this statement
I played drums in all sorts of bands... covered everything, from Iron Maiden to Jethro Tull, Billy Cobham to Pink Floyd, Santana, Deep Purple and many more... but, this guy... this guy is a headache. I started with great under-estimation of his drumming skills, continued with raised eyebrow, followed with frustration and pure hate and disgust for his ideas, and finally ended with genuine respect for this musician. Ringo is king-o!
This sure does brighten up a miserable grey/rainy London day - thanks RP
Love the segue from Massive Attack's "Unfinished Symphony". Wouldn't have thought of it, but it works!
Shmelo wrote:
I don't think you know what the word literally means.
Substitute critically - I think that is what is meant.
I don't think you know what the word literally means.
Substitute critically - I think that is what is meant.
1966. How can anyone say The Beatles were just another band?
DJJJJ wrote:
Some call it chaos - all part of the whole
The beginning has sounds playing in reverse, then sounds like monkeys being catapulted over a wall. And then there are some strange skips in the beat. All in all too unsettling to be music for the soul. This is musical unraveling, music should be healing. Not a fan.
Some call it chaos - all part of the whole
Public Service Announcement: Please pay for RP. Send them $5 a month or MORE. I give and we should all do so. Nothing stays free. Support Radio Paradise. (I'm not paid to say this, just a fan, who pays for you to enjoy).
ecab68 wrote:
Just recently watched the documentary about the Beatles learning Transcendental Meditation in India and I am realizing this song is one that came out of that experience, it's not about doing drugs as I thought it was, haha.
I think John called it the "acid album" and first lines of this song are a quote from Timothy Leary. I'm sure meditation played a part too.Just recently watched the documentary about the Beatles learning Transcendental Meditation in India and I am realizing this song is one that came out of that experience, it's not about doing drugs as I thought it was, haha.
Less beatles would be nicer
Still sounding as fresh today as it was when it was released 54 years ago. Amazing song to end an amazing album.
ImaOldman wrote:
Diversity is a good thing. Including a diversity of listeners. No need to be a hater.
More than 250 people rated this song a 5 or less, 79 of them rated it a 1. I didn't realize that many hearing impaired folks listened to RP...
Diversity is a good thing. Including a diversity of listeners. No need to be a hater.
The beginning has sounds playing in reverse, then sounds like monkeys being catapulted over a wall. And then there are some strange skips in the beat. All in all too unsettling to be music for the soul. This is musical unraveling, music should be healing. Not a fan.
Steely_D wrote:
Quite true, but I've always thought of this particular cut as the only (minor) flaw on their very best album.
Fifty two years ago... How can anyone doubt the Beatles' importance in the history of music?
Quite true, but I've always thought of this particular cut as the only (minor) flaw on their very best album.
idiot_wind wrote:
Absolutely nailed it! Ringo may not have 'sounded' like a great drummer - maybe because of the simplicity? - but his keeping time was second to none; I'm no percussionist myself but know several drummers that reiterate this statement
I never realized that Ringo was a pretty good drummer. But was overshadowed by competition: G. Baker, K. Moon, J. Bonham.
Absolutely nailed it! Ringo may not have 'sounded' like a great drummer - maybe because of the simplicity? - but his keeping time was second to none; I'm no percussionist myself but know several drummers that reiterate this statement
be4con wrote:
And yesterday could have been released yesterday, or today.
Wait, who's on first?
This could have been released yesterday. Brilliant tune.
And yesterday could have been released yesterday, or today.
Wait, who's on first?
Revolver was a phenomenal album but very "buttoned up" compared to later Beatles psychedelia. This is by far my favorite track, but always feels a disjointed as the epilogue to the record. I often forget this was part of Revolver and not Magical Mystery Tour!
I never realized that Ringo was a pretty good drummer. But was overshadowed by competition: G. Baker, K. Moon, J. Bonham.
unclehud wrote:
Let's do some serious drugs, y'all!
Love this album, as it veered sharply off the path of rock and roll development. Even has a reverse-tape guitar solo.
No need for drugs man. Drugs are for dopes.Love this album, as it veered sharply off the path of rock and roll development. Even has a reverse-tape guitar solo.
My new Beats headphones are changing my views on many songs like this, hearing subtleties computer speakers didn't transfer well.
Steely_D wrote:
54!
Fifty two years ago... How can anyone doubt the Beatles' importance in the history of music?
54!
ace-marc wrote:
I was not a big Beatles fan, but when this came out it became a favorite of mine. But I like weird music. I think most people thought it was 'odd'.
first ever mainstream psychedelic song?
what the heck did listeners in 1966 make of this?
oustanding tune - were the Beatles even better when they stepped away from their more
familiar pop recipe?
what the heck did listeners in 1966 make of this?
oustanding tune - were the Beatles even better when they stepped away from their more
familiar pop recipe?
I was not a big Beatles fan, but when this came out it became a favorite of mine. But I like weird music. I think most people thought it was 'odd'.
as others stated , way ahead of its time.
Paradisealan56 wrote:
Maybe the first "sampling" in pop music, but composers and musicians had been composing and recording "experimental music" with samples and tape loops since the 1940s.
The original sampling?
Maybe the first "sampling" in pop music, but composers and musicians had been composing and recording "experimental music" with samples and tape loops since the 1940s.
Let's do some serious drugs, y'all!
Love this album, as it veered sharply off the path of rock and roll development. Even has a reverse-tape guitar solo.
Love this album, as it veered sharply off the path of rock and roll development. Even has a reverse-tape guitar solo.
it is the last number on 1966 Revolver and it actually is Ringo in reverse..
It was a real shocker- believe me...
amcostigan88 wrote:
exactly - the beat alone (is that really ringo?) is light years away from the time of its recording
So unbelievably ahead of its time.
exactly - the beat alone (is that really ringo?) is light years away from the time of its recording
So unbelievably ahead of its time.
t0m5k1 wrote:
Uh, no. That would be the Chemical Brothers sounding like the Beatles in this song.
This sounds sooooo much like the chemical brothers it is amazing
Uh, no. That would be the Chemical Brothers sounding like the Beatles in this song.
idiot_wind wrote:
Rubber Soul.
Is this the first pyschodelic album?
Rubber Soul.
Guys were sampling themselves before sampling was possible/the thing.
ImaOldman wrote:
The are 1,182 RPs with excellent hearing.
More than 250 people rated this song a 5 or less, 79 of them rated it a 1. I didn't realize that many hearing impaired folks listened to RP...
The are 1,182 RPs with excellent hearing.
Yeah but....LSD was still legal in 1966?
Astonishing still, even after 50+ years. A ten, of course.
The original sampling?
Is this the first pyschodelic album?
ace-marc wrote:
It is easy and hard to answer that question at the same time. It was brand new and fresh and catchy to boot. Even more important was that when we were young un's back then it meant that we would not be listening to Lawrence Welk and Mantovani or Perry Como like our parents when we got to their age that we are today. That thought scared me to death growing up as a kid back then.
first ever mainstream psychedelic song?
what the heck did listeners in 1966 make of this?
oustanding tune - were the Beatles even better when they stepped away from their more
familiar pop recipe?
what the heck did listeners in 1966 make of this?
oustanding tune - were the Beatles even better when they stepped away from their more
familiar pop recipe?
It is easy and hard to answer that question at the same time. It was brand new and fresh and catchy to boot. Even more important was that when we were young un's back then it meant that we would not be listening to Lawrence Welk and Mantovani or Perry Como like our parents when we got to their age that we are today. That thought scared me to death growing up as a kid back then.
This could have been released yesterday. Brilliant tune.
my favorite beatles tune, hands down. amazing piece of work. 50+ years old and still fresh.
This sounds sooooo much like the chemical brothers it is amazing
I hear the Beatles every day. In my car, on TV, in the store. I know 95% of their songs and I generally lump them into two categories, pop and psychedelic. . All of a sudden it hits me - is this the song that crossed the Rubicon?
People that think The Beatles were just another band, need to hear this song in the context of 1966. Truly groundbreaking in many ways. Again.
first ever mainstream psychedelic song?
what the heck did listeners in 1966 make of this?
oustanding tune - were the Beatles even better when they stepped away from their more
familiar pop recipe?
what the heck did listeners in 1966 make of this?
oustanding tune - were the Beatles even better when they stepped away from their more
familiar pop recipe?
Never really appreciated the brilliance of this piece until I watched the Madmen episode featuring the song. Don Draper was not a fan, but I appreciated it much more after her (re)introduction. Thank you, Megan Draper!
Electro-acoustic sound manipulation. Tripping, 1966. Ground breaking.
That love is all
And love is everyone
It is knowing
It is knowing
That love is all
And love is everyone
It is knowing
It is knowing
Whatever you might think of The Beatles music, I don't think the power of this piece can be denied. This changed the landscape. If you have not already, search out the story behind it. It's important.
One of the most revolutionary songs in the history of mankind... or even more
Steely_D wrote:
Someone that vote 0 and i think don't know nothing about music and story.
Not all people have to love the Beatles but without Beatles, Stones and most of 60's great groups and artists don't exists neighter rap, hi-hop, trance, metal, death and much more genres that loves who vote 0 for Beatles.
Fifty two years ago... How can anyone doubt the Beatles' importance in the history of music?
Someone that vote 0 and i think don't know nothing about music and story.
Not all people have to love the Beatles but without Beatles, Stones and most of 60's great groups and artists don't exists neighter rap, hi-hop, trance, metal, death and much more genres that loves who vote 0 for Beatles.
I like the porpoise sounds.
More than 250 people rated this song a 5 or less, 79 of them rated it a 1. I didn't realize that many hearing impaired folks listened to RP...
Fifty two years ago... How can anyone doubt the Beatles' importance in the history of music?
Proclivities wrote:
I'm not sure why you are taking such an aggressive tones with MassivRuss. His post was clearly sarcastic and/or facetious. If you would've checked his profile you'd see that he gives several Beatles songs - including this one - very high ratings. I guess sarcasm doesn't always translate well when written.
You, of course are correct and I don't know what was going on with either my sarcasm detector or tone moderator that day. I suspect I had just switched tabs from political commenting. Gotta watch that.
I'm not sure why you are taking such an aggressive tones with MassivRuss. His post was clearly sarcastic and/or facetious. If you would've checked his profile you'd see that he gives several Beatles songs - including this one - very high ratings. I guess sarcasm doesn't always translate well when written.
You, of course are correct and I don't know what was going on with either my sarcasm detector or tone moderator that day. I suspect I had just switched tabs from political commenting. Gotta watch that.
Happy 4/20.
zenhead wrote:
To think this was recorded in 1966 blows me away.
This piece never fails to astonish me. Even with the tech of today, I don't hear anything like this. To think this was all done by hand with analog tape, (and a clever engineer, routing the vocal thru a Leslie speaker), blows me away.
To think this was recorded in 1966 blows me away.
Budhist music...
This is one of the best Beatles songs ever, if not *the* best...at least in terms of lyrics and message.
Love the drums and backward music! I find myself going into a meditative state when I listen to this song and focus on the lyrics.
This is one of the best Beatles songs ever, if not *the* best...at least in terms of lyrics and message.
Love the drums and backward music! I find myself going into a meditative state when I listen to this song and focus on the lyrics.
Hard to rate any song as godlike. But this one...easy.
kcar wrote:
Could your space alien friends kidnap Drumpf? You could be the write-in GOP candidate.
I wish so, kcar, but alas, we are now trapped with the Trumpster dumpster in charge... time flies when we're having fun... I hope you are having fun these days, kcar, as we approach a new year... everybody in my hotel room loves this incredible classic song that is so apropos to this moment in time... we be dancing like happy hippies... love Radio Paradise...
Could your space alien friends kidnap Drumpf? You could be the write-in GOP candidate.
I wish so, kcar, but alas, we are now trapped with the Trumpster dumpster in charge... time flies when we're having fun... I hope you are having fun these days, kcar, as we approach a new year... everybody in my hotel room loves this incredible classic song that is so apropos to this moment in time... we be dancing like happy hippies... love Radio Paradise...
Every time I hear this song, I just want to go find the biggest floor pillow I can find and go sit down cross-legged in it.
GREAT segue from Radiohead's Daydreaming to TNK. Landed squarely on it's feet it did!
One of my pinnacle Beatles tunes...never gets old.
Dazzerb wrote:
Thank goodness for LSD. Otherwise this music would have never been created.
how can anyone in their right mind think this is good music. It literally hurts my head listening to it.
thank goodness for PSD.
thank goodness for PSD.
Thank goodness for LSD. Otherwise this music would have never been created.
SHEER BRILLIANCE!!! Don't even try to tell me otherwise!
Bat wrote:
It's a lost cause. It has been misused so much that dictionaries now list both meanings as acceptable. Using "literally" for hyperbolic emphasis is now allowed. Literally and Figuratively are now synonyms.
It makes me so mad that steam is literally coming out of my ears!
A year after the fact, thank you Bat for the defense.
It's a lost cause. It has been misused so much that dictionaries now list both meanings as acceptable. Using "literally" for hyperbolic emphasis is now allowed. Literally and Figuratively are now synonyms.
It makes me so mad that steam is literally coming out of my ears!
A year after the fact, thank you Bat for the defense.
Proclivities wrote:
I stand corrected. I remember wondering if the comment was sarcastic, and concluded on the other side of correct. Should have checked before I typed. It was fun looking at it in context to other 1966 songs though.
I'm not sure why you are taking such an aggressive tones with MassivRuss. His post was clearly sarcastic and/or facetious. If you would've checked his profile you'd see that he gives several Beatles songs - including this one - very high ratings. I guess sarcasm doesn't always translate well when written.
I stand corrected. I remember wondering if the comment was sarcastic, and concluded on the other side of correct. Should have checked before I typed. It was fun looking at it in context to other 1966 songs though.
This piece never fails to astonish me. Even with the tech of today, I don't hear anything like this. To think this was all done by hand with analog tape, (and a clever engineer, routing the vocal thru a Leslie speaker), blows me away.
10. Yes, Godlike.
MassivRuss wrote:
kingart wrote:
Perhaps you can explain why, 47 years after their dissolution, the Fab Four are annually still among the best selling bands and brands of music, movies and ancillary items. In fact, many current buyers hadn't yet been born when their final hits The Long and Winding Road and Let it Be had their last plays as current songs on the airwaves. Unless you consider a 35 year old an old square fart. Beg your pardon.
Save the put downs or cynicism for fans of (insert any 2000s' musical act here) that will be shuffling out of the cycle when next you hear Can't Buy Me Love (1964) or All You Need Is Love (1967) on your radio, or on RP.
Typesbad wrote:
That is kind of the point with this song, though. 1966!! Here is a listing of the top songs of 1966.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Billboard_Hot_100_number-one_singles_of_1966
Good songs, many of them, but none anywhere close to as innovative as this one. "Good Vibrations" is the only one that even comes close. That in part ,is what us old farts find so attractive about Beatles songs. Too bad for you that you weren't there.
I'm not sure why you are taking such an aggressive tones with MassivRuss. His post was clearly sarcastic and/or facetious. If you would've checked his profile you'd see that he gives several Beatles songs - including this one - very high ratings. I guess sarcasm doesn't always translate well when written.
1966 people - One Nine Six Six!!!
50 years ago.
Yea the Beatles are for old square farts.
50 years ago.
Yea the Beatles are for old square farts.
kingart wrote:
Perhaps you can explain why, 47 years after their dissolution, the Fab Four are annually still among the best selling bands and brands of music, movies and ancillary items. In fact, many current buyers hadn't yet been born when their final hits The Long and Winding Road and Let it Be had their last plays as current songs on the airwaves. Unless you consider a 35 year old an old square fart. Beg your pardon.
Save the put downs or cynicism for fans of (insert any 2000s' musical act here) that will be shuffling out of the cycle when next you hear Can't Buy Me Love (1964) or All You Need Is Love (1967) on your radio, or on RP.
Typesbad wrote:
That is kind of the point with this song, though. 1966!! Here is a listing of the top songs of 1966.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Billboard_Hot_100_number-one_singles_of_1966
Good songs, many of them, but none anywhere close to as innovative as this one. "Good Vibrations" is the only one that even comes close. That in part ,is what us old farts find so attractive about Beatles songs. Too bad for you that you weren't there.
I'm not sure why you are taking such an aggressive tones with MassivRuss. His post was clearly sarcastic and/or facetious. If you would've checked his profile you'd see that he gives several Beatles songs - including this one - very high ratings. I guess sarcasm doesn't always translate well when written.
This still blows me away...