Yeah, I agree with what the OP is saying on the whole, but in fact, the Beatles did have more creativity and innovation than One Direction. the Beatles weren't as really appreciated for their talent during their time, but I doubt One Direction will gain the same reputation in 30 years time
I hate comparisons like this. Obviously it's a generalization but one direction has a vast majority of female fans. While the Beatles did have 'beatlamania' it's not the same
No, they have similarities, which you are thinking of. They are both succesful music groups, but while One Direction made songs that were in the top 10 charts, Beatles revolutionized music as a whole. They paved the way for any modern musician today. One Direction has computer generated sounds made to sound like instruments, and their voices may or may not (probably are for certain notes) be digitally enhanced. The Beatles relied on creativity and talent, not on their looks. If they wanted an echo, they would rely on the acoustics of the room.
Those similarities are also shared with a number of other bands. That doesn't make One Direction the new Beatles. To say 1D is like the Beatles of this generation would mean that they have more similarities than differences, which is not true.
The Beatles might not have gotten hate over the Internet, but they did have radios refusing to play their music and large groups of people around the US burning their records. The Internet isn't the only means of hate, is what I'm trying to say.
To add o my previous comment, the never won any competition. The entered all as individuals on the 2010 season of Xfactor where Simon cowell put them in a group together. As a group they came in third place
This comparison is patently ridiculous. It's the exact same thing as comparing Justin bieber to the Beatles. By some definitions the Beatles are not a boy band and if they are so are the who the rolling stones and the beach boys as well as a ton of others. I would say the biggest difference is their fan bases. One direction has probably 90% female fan base. Which was not at all true of the beatles
I don't really agree, just because the Beatles were the band for several years, and the game that they had had never been reached by any other band before. But now, One Direction has just as much fame as, say, Justin Beiber did. Also, there's a difference in creativity and talent and whatnot, but I think the main difference here is just how popular each group was and is
Yeah, I agree with what the OP is saying on the whole, but in fact, the Beatles did have more creativity and innovation than One Direction. the Beatles weren't as really appreciated for their talent during their time, but I doubt One Direction will gain the same reputation in 30 years time
The post pretty much states that this generation likes shitty music. That's the way I see it anyway.
I hate comparisons like this. Obviously it's a generalization but one direction has a vast majority of female fans. While the Beatles did have 'beatlamania' it's not the same
No, they have similarities, which you are thinking of. They are both succesful music groups, but while One Direction made songs that were in the top 10 charts, Beatles revolutionized music as a whole. They paved the way for any modern musician today. One Direction has computer generated sounds made to sound like instruments, and their voices may or may not (probably are for certain notes) be digitally enhanced. The Beatles relied on creativity and talent, not on their looks. If they wanted an echo, they would rely on the acoustics of the room.
Those similarities are also shared with a number of other bands. That doesn't make One Direction the new Beatles. To say 1D is like the Beatles of this generation would mean that they have more similarities than differences, which is not true.
They didn't win Uks got talent...
@kirstenAnn neither am I haha, just thought I'd point it out
The Beatles might not have gotten hate over the Internet, but they did have radios refusing to play their music and large groups of people around the US burning their records. The Internet isn't the only means of hate, is what I'm trying to say.
I'm not a huge fan of 1D so I didn't know for sure, I just guessed from what I knew. Thank you for telling me.
To add o my previous comment, the never won any competition. The entered all as individuals on the 2010 season of Xfactor where Simon cowell put them in a group together. As a group they came in third place
This comparison is patently ridiculous. It's the exact same thing as comparing Justin bieber to the Beatles. By some definitions the Beatles are not a boy band and if they are so are the who the rolling stones and the beach boys as well as a ton of others. I would say the biggest difference is their fan bases. One direction has probably 90% female fan base. Which was not at all true of the beatles
It makes me wonder how much more popular the Beatles would have been if they had the technology we have now.
I don't really agree, just because the Beatles were the band for several years, and the game that they had had never been reached by any other band before. But now, One Direction has just as much fame as, say, Justin Beiber did. Also, there's a difference in creativity and talent and whatnot, but I think the main difference here is just how popular each group was and is
The Beatles didn't suck...
I never said they did.
I think the post is saying that people who say 'One Direction sucks, the Beatles are the best' fail to realize that they had many similarities.
Guys and girls both loved the Beatles. I don't know any guys who love one direction. Also their music is incomparable.
I know guys who like 1D.
Althoigh it's a bit of an exaggeration pugs point still stands. And is the biggest reason this comparison fails
The Beatles weren't all that revolutionary. If any band changed the face of music, it was The Rolling Stones.
Can we really know if the band revolutionizes the music scene this early on? It's only been a year for 1D.