Federer Is.......John Lennon?

[BrokenGears]

Still almost no similarities except that both Fed and Paul are cautious in their public words, diplomatic, highly conscious of their public image and narcissists (Macca being a thousand times more so than Roger).

Fed as a human being off the tennis court seems quite dull, below average intelligence (has openly admitted he never reads books, for instance), and just sort of an average person. His tennis is what is brilliant, very little else. But that's the case with 99% of tennis players. The only players who ever seemed articulate and intelligent are Courier, Youzhny, Troicki and Nole, who I think is the brightest of the bunch. If you asked all of the top 500 tennis players to know who Dostoevsky is, the only two who would probably have any clue would be Troicki and Nole. Possibly Gulbis, and the Russian/Ukranian guys.

So Federer confirmed to be dum.

And people doubted me. Nole is the Einstein of tennis.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Don't you think John's death makes him more legendary?

Hendrix, Morrison, Cobain... and other members of the 27-Club, I'm pretty sure that people would talk about them less if they lived longer.

Probably yeah. But i cant wish for anyone to die (outside of legit murderers etc) .

Not sure the legacy would be increased for an athlete to die young in the same way as a musician

 

[ak24alive]

Fed as a human being off the tennis court seems quite dull, below average intelligence (has openly admitted he never reads books, for instance), and just sort of an average person. His tennis is what is brilliant, very little else. But that's the case with 99% of tennis players. The only players who ever seemed articulate and intelligent are Courier, Youzhny, Troicki and Nole, who I think is the brightest of the bunch. If you asked all of the top 500 tennis players to know who Dostoevsky is, the only two who would probably have any clue would be Troicki and Nole. Possibly Gulbis, and the Russian/Ukranian guys.

How low do you think of Roger as an individual(other than the tennis player)?
You call him image conscious and narcissistic. No offence but all evidence is contrary to your claims. We sit here having never met Rog and we judge him on what basis I don't know! There are a gazillion quotes out there by professional players and coaches calling Roger a great human being who cares about others and is exactly the same off the camera as he is when the camera is on. I can give you countless examples of this. When people have a conversation with Rog he talks about their family and always asks how they are doing, always send notes to injured players. And Rog never talks like a robot in press conferences and interviews on court.
Clearly this guy isn't a fake and like all people he cares about his image(because afterall he is a human being) but he can't be called image conscious.
And surely he isn't narcissistic because he gives so much importance to people around him. Narcissists with as much fame as Rog(look at Hollywood) don't behave as normal as Rog does. He stays simple despite all the fame he has. I would go as far as to say that Rog is the opposite of a narcissist.

Also you must know that overall intelligence comprises of iq and eq?
Federer is so high on emotional intelligence that I think no player in history would come close to that. Only a person with galactic levels of eq can change and adapt so much that they go on from being a racquet basher to putting up a poker face for 15 years and being hailed as the epitome of calmness.
While you will argue that it's only because of his playing style but to me his longevity is also a sign of his intelligence.
Don't you think the way he plays is a sign of intelligence? The tactically profound genius maestro is dumb! Oh come on.
He speaks multiple languages. And I agree he is not an overall genius but he is way above average.
PS: I make all these claims with so much evidence to support them yet I admit I am not 100% sure of them. But you make your claims with such confidence that it rivals that of tennis_hands'

 

[Incognito]

”Jealous Guy” and ”The Long and Winding Road” are my favorite Beatles songs. Whoever wrote these songs is the best Beatle for me.

 

[ak24alive]

”Jealous Guy” and ”The Long and Winding Road” are my favorite Beatles songs. Whoever wrote these songs is the best Beatle for me.

Jealous Guy was written by John and The Long and Winding Road by Paul. Now you have to choose which song you like better to choose which Beatle you like better.

 

[TheGhostOfAgassi]

Still almost no similarities except that both Fed and Paul are cautious in their public words, diplomatic, highly conscious of their public image and narcissists (Macca being a thousand times more so than Roger).

Fed as a human being off the tennis court seems quite dull, below average intelligence (has openly admitted he never reads books, for instance), and just sort of an average person. His tennis is what is brilliant, very little else. But that's the case with 99% of tennis players. The only players who ever seemed articulate and intelligent are Courier, Youzhny, Troicki and Nole, who I think is the brightest of the bunch. If you asked all of the top 500 tennis players to know who Dostoevsky is, the only two who would probably have any clue would be Troicki and Nole. Possibly Gulbis, and the Russian/Ukranian guys.

Federer digs shopping.
Thats one special specimen. A man that likes that. So that could be something fun doing w him.

Gulbis is very well read!

 

[Incognito]

Jealous Guy was written by John and The Long and Winding Road by Paul. Now you have to choose which song you like better to choose which Beatle you like better.

Wow! Honestly, I don’t think I can choose

 

[Fedforever]

Lennon: An Original, very complex human being who could be an a—hole but also kind and brilliant. On the cutting edge of music, always searching in life and in profession. More concerned with meaning than earthly things.

Macca: Old guard personality. Wrote music for mindless entertainment over meaning. Quality but pandering safe songs. Highly materialistic and wouldn’t even spend a dime on his daughters wedding and is killing the Beatles future place in history with his greed.

Can’t really think of any current player that matches Lennon’s definition really.

That's a very dated view, the image of Lennon as the radical and McCartney as the safe one is long gone. Try Ian MacDonald's Revolution in the Head which put the nail in the coffin for this myth.

 

[Fedforever]

Disagree with the people saying that Fed is not acerbic. Watch him give the burn to this journalist whilst maintaining a smile

 

[ak24alive]

Wow! Honestly, I don’t think I can choose

To me their best song is Hey Jude. But what do I know! Not a big Beatles fan although I like them a lot. I am a Zeppelin fan.
PS: Did anyone see the Roland Garros ad that's on the tv in every ad break? It has a lovely background music. I can't find it on the internet. Can anyone help me with it?

 

[ak24alive]

Disagree with the people saying that Fed is not acerbic. Watch him give the burn to this journalist whilst maintaining a smile

Fed is very sharp and can be very funny at times.

 

[Plamen1234]

Federer is a religious experience.Being sports fan can be called religious experience also - though it depends how much fanatic you are.I mean I know few people who refuse to talk to each other because they support rival teams.Sometimes people take the sport too seriously

 

[Fedforever]

”Jealous Guy” and ”The Long and Winding Road” are my favorite Beatles songs. Whoever wrote these songs is the best Beatle for me.

One each although the first is a Lennon song and not a Lennon/McCartney. The second is a McCartney song although officially Lennon/McCartney

 

[BrokenGears]

How low do you think of Roger as an individual(other than the tennis player)?
You call him image conscious and narcissistic. No offence but all evidence is contrary to your claims. We sit here having never met Rog and we judge him on what basis I don't know! There are a gazillion quotes out there by professional players and coaches calling Roger a great human being who cares about others and is exactly the same off the camera as he is when the camera is on. I can give you countless examples of this. When people have a conversation with Rog he talks about their family and always asks how they are doing, always send notes to injured players. And Rog never talks like a robot in press conferences and interviews on court.
Clearly this guy isn't a fake and like all people he cares about his image(because afterall he is a human being) but he can't be called image conscious.
And surely he isn't narcissistic because he gives so much importance to people around him. Narcissists with as much fame as Rog(look at Hollywood) don't behave as normal as Rog does. He stays simple despite all the fame he has. I would go as far as to say that Rog is the opposite of a narcissist.

Also you must know that overall intelligence comprises of iq and eq?
Federer is so high on emotional intelligence that I think no player in history would come close to that. Only a person with galactic levels of eq can change and adapt so much that they go on from being a racquet basher to putting up a poker face for 15 years and being hailed as the epitome of calmness.
While you will argue that it's only because of his playing style but to me his longevity is also a sign of his intelligence.
Don't you think the way he plays is a sign of intelligence? The tactically profound genius maestro is dumb! Oh come on.
He speaks multiple languages. And I agree he is not an overall genius but he is way above average.
PS: I make all these claims with so much evidence to support them yet I admit I am not 100% sure of them. But you make your claims with such confidence that it rivals that of tennis_hands'

I’m pretty sure Beatles has actually met Fed before(not 100%)...She is also a huge Fed fan and has watched him for a long time(again not 100%)

I always thought he lacked emotion and that’s evident in his matches and press conferences. While that poker face has been breaking down a bit, he’s nowhere near as emotional when you compare him to his rivals. He’s more of a robot emotionally when compared to Nole. While that’s cool, I never liked Fed cause of it.

It’s obvious Fed is very image conscious lol. He says things like “ Serena is the greatest of all time “ etc...He doesn’t say things that are controversial at all. Use the example of Djokovic. He’s the only big name with enough balls to call out gender equality in tennis.

You do realize he grew up with those languages right? I speak 3 languages, but I grew up with all 2 of them. It’s still impressive, but not as impressive as someone as Nole who goes out of his way to learn multiple languages.

It’s obvious to anyway that Fed is a bit above average, but someone who doesn’t read at all isn’t gonna be someone who wins awards for being smart.

Nole is smarter than Fed

 

[ojo rojo]

MuryGOAT

 

[kevaninho]

Lennon: An Original, very complex human being who could be an a—hole but also kind and brilliant. On the cutting edge of music, always searching in life and in profession. More concerned with meaning than earthly things.

Macca: Old guard personality. Wrote music for mindless entertainment over meaning. Quality but pandering safe songs. Highly materialistic and wouldn’t even spend a dime on his daughters wedding and is killing the Beatles future place in history with his greed.

Can’t really think of any current player that matches Lennon’s definition really.

You clearly know nothing about the Beatles mate.
McCartney arguably wrote more meaningful songs than Lennon especially in the latter years when Lennon was otherwise occupied.
Hardly 'safe' songs.

 

[kevaninho]

Don't you think John's death makes him more legendary?

Hendrix, Morrison, Cobain... and other members of the 27-Club, I'm pretty sure that people would talk about them less if they lived longer.

Probably makes him more legendary, the same as if it was Paul.
But Hendrix , Morrison, Cobain etc never touched the career of those 2 Beatles.
Dying at 27 , when both John & Paul were still making hits at 40.
Big difference.

 

[Phoenix1983]

Certainly the Big 4 and the Fab 4 line up as follows;

John Lennon = Roger Federer
Paul McCartney = Rafael Nadal
George Harrison = Novak Djokovic
Ringo Starr = Andy Murray

Agreed upon by all objective tennis and music observers.

 

[Charleneriva]

Best Beatles song, in my opinion.

I would refer A Day in the Life more as a recording than a song, considering how heavily produced it is (in a good way of course) and the production is what makes that song/track more than the main tune itself imo.

Even though I most often use the word "song" for a melody with lyrics just like everybody does, in my mind I always distinguish clearly between a song/main tune and the recording or the production of it. In many cases there's not much a difference between them - you can strip down most or all the accompaniments and your perception of the song still remains the same - it still sounds just as good or even better.

In many other cases however, especially when the main tune is not that good/strong on its own, a good or not so good/bad production can take the song to a whole new level or shrink it down to a lower one. Believe me, you would likely find a lot of those in many popular songs, even in classical music/symphonies, if you pay a little bit attention.

A Day in the Life is no doubt a very popular choice amongst fans, largely thanks to the unique sonic experience it brings to the listeners imo (and to "the fifth Beatle" ) and I love it as well. But imo there is simply no "best Beatles song" - song vs recording aside, it's all subjective and most of all, doesn't matter, especially with a legendary and super prolific band like Beatles.

Each song moves or effects each listener in a different way. Catherine Holmes à Court, the daughter of Robert Holmes à Court, who acquired ATV’s holding company then sold the Beatles catalogue to Michael Jackson, was given a choice of having any Beatles song to her name, and she chose the much lower profile Penny Lane, not Yesterday, which was then the most popular and biggest royalty profitable one (currently still the fourth of all time). How lovely is that?

Not a fan of superlatives and since I love so many Beatles songs, I simply can't chose the best one. But I guess I can tell which song moves me the most - The Long and Winding Road.

Of course, I mean the stripped-down version on Anthology 3 or even better, the most intimate, minimal one on Let It Be.... Naked / Get Back sessions - my personal favourite.

Cheers to all Beatles fans and non-Beatles fans who love some of their songs.

 

[Phoenix1983]

^ Irrespective of what the “best” Beatles song is (and the fact you call the legendary tune that is Penny Lane low profile shows how many classics they have), I think A Day In The Life is the one that simultaneously showcases the genius of both Lennon and McCartney. Most of their greatest songs are products of only one genius (be it Lennon, McCartney or Harrison).

 

[Charleneriva]

That's a very dated view, the image of Lennon as the radical and McCartney as the safe one is long gone. Try Ian MacDonald's Revolution in the Head which put the nail in the coffin for this myth.

Revolution in the Head is rather biased, judging, way over-analytical and self-important imo. A wordy, Freudian kind of books - never my cup of tea.

Also, it's not that informative or "revealing" if one has some modest-decent knowledge about Beatles and music and most of all, trust their own ears.

That said, if you like Paul and don't mind the Freudian thingy and stuff, the author's appreciation of Paul might make you like the book on a whole. (And I totally agree with you on the conventionally superficial, dated, biased and simply silly, ignorant sentiments on Paul and John, both music and the men).

If you prefer more balanced, intimate insights, helpful information and overall a more enjoyable reading from the actual insiders about the Beatles's recording sessions and the dynamics inside the studios, I would suggest All You Need Is Ears by George Martin himself (if you don't mind getting to know more about "the fifth Beatle" also ) and Here, There and Everywhere: My Life Recording the Music of the Beatles by Geoff Emerick (needs to be read with a bit of an open-minded since it's personal recollections as the title would suggest and chances are you won't agree with everything it says).

Such a shame both are rather short-reads though, especially George Martin's book.

Ahh, missing people and things quite a bit. Probably not the best idea to discuss music and stuff on a tennis forum...

 

[Charleneriva]

”Jealous Guy” and ”The Long and Winding Road” are my favorite Beatles songs. Whoever wrote these songs is the best Beatle for me.

I guess you're not that much of a Beatles fan (nothing wrong with that of course).

It can't get any easier to distinguish who wrote or wrote the most of what. The main/sole writer would sing his song, just as simple as that, unless of course he wrote for Ringo . And Jealous Guy is a John's song, not a Beatles or Lennon/McCartney's.

To me their best song is Hey Jude. But what do I know! Not a big Beatles fan although I like them a lot. I am a Zeppelin fan.
PS: Did anyone see the Roland Garros ad that's on the tv in every ad break? It has a lovely background music. I can't find it on the internet. Can anyone help me with it?

Used to love the coda on Hey Jude very much. Quite touching back story as well.

Led Zeppelin, yes! How about Deep Purple? Pink Floyd? The Who?... etc.?

Didn't pay attention to the ad. Will do tomorrow.

 

[Charleneriva]

Certainly the Big 4 and the Fab 4 line up as follows;

John Lennon = Roger Federer
Paul McCartney = Rafael Nadal
George Harrison = Novak Djokovic
Ringo Starr = Andy Murray

Agreed upon by all objective tennis and music observers.

You mean this?

I would prefer this:

and this is not so bad either:

 

[Fedforever]

Revolution in the Head is rather biased, judging, way over-analytical and self-important imo. A wordy, Freudian kind of books - never my cup of tea.

Also, it's not that informative or "revealing" if one has some modest-decent knowledge about Beatles and music and most of all, trust their own ears.

That said, if you like Paul and don't mind the Freudian thingy and stuff, the author's appreciation of Paul might make you like the book on a whole. (And I totally agree with you on the conventionally superficial, dated, biased and simply silly, ignorant sentiments on Paul and John, both music and the men).

If you prefer more balanced, intimate insights, helpful information and overall a more enjoyable reading from the actual insiders about the Beatles's recording sessions and the dynamics inside the studios, I would suggest All You Need Is Ears by George Martin himself (if you don't mind getting to know more about "the fifth Beatle" also ) and Here, There and Everywhere: My Life Recording the Music of the Beatles by Geoff Emerick (needs to be read with a bit of an open-minded since it's personal recollections as the title would suggest and chances are you won't agree with everything it says).

Such a shame both are rather short-reads though, especially George Martin's book.

Ahh, missing people and things quite a bit. Probably not the best idea to discuss music and stuff on a tennis forum...

Thank you, I think I did read the George Martin book many years ago, but I didn't know about the Emerick one.

I agree the Macdonald book is opinionated (and Paul himself isn't that keen on it https://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/paul-mccartney-the-long-and-winding-q-a-20140717 ) but I like a book where I keep having to stop and think "Do I agree with this?" You end up much clearer about what you think and why. And it did an important job in dispelling the hackneyed old softie Paul image. I'm always surprised to see it's still around and it's depressing that it will probably never die.

Willaim Skidelsky did a book on Federer where I disagreed with lots of it but ended up with loads of new insights through thinking about what he was saying. Sometimes even a good TTW thread will do that if you can keep it troll-free for long enough!

 

[ojo rojo]

Nevermind McCLennon

GeorgeHarrisonGOAT

 

[ak24alive]

Used to love the coda on Hey Jude very much. Quite touching back story as well.

Led Zeppelin, yes! How about Deep Purple? Pink Floyd? The Who?... etc.?

Didn't pay attention to the ad. Will do tomorrow.

Well to be honest I haven't listened much to Pink Floyd except Another brick in the wall(loved it) and maybe two more and that too a long time ago. Haven't listened to any songs of Deep Purple and The Who. My rock experience is very limited. A few songs of AC DC, Guns and Roses, Metallica, Beatles and that's pretty much it. I have listened to everything Led Zeppelin ever made though. They somehow seem very different to me than all the other rock greats.
I like rock(other than Zeppelin) but only to the extent of listening to it when someone else finds a nice song for me. I never strive to look for it on the internet myself. More than Rock songs I like instrumental rock music better.
Ex:

Spoiler

(I'll use the spoiler because so many videos look messy)

My preferred genre however is classical music. Music like this:

Spoiler

Also I can qualify as a fan of jazz, country songs and blues.
Other than that there's a load of Indian Music which you probably won't be familiar with.
Still if you want to explore it here's a piece. I will post an Indian Classical music and rock fusion piece so that you can relate better.

Spoiler

Another beautiful one is this:

Pardon me for the big post. Then again if we don't get excited when talking music how well do we qualify as humans lol

 

[ak24alive]

@Charleneriva I almost carried out a blasphemous act there because we can't conclude a post about music without mentioning this GOAT song. Now can we @Poisoned Slice ?

 

[Crisstti]

Thank you, I think I did read the George Martin book many years ago, but I didn't know about the Emerick one.

I agree the Macdonald book is opinionated (and Paul himself isn't that keen on it https://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/paul-mccartney-the-long-and-winding-q-a-20140717 ) but I like a book where I keep having to stop and think "Do I agree with this?" You end up much clearer about what you think and why. And it did an important job in dispelling the hackneyed old softie Paul image. I'm always surprised to see it's still around and it's depressing that it will probably never die.

Willaim Skidelsky did a book on Federer where I disagreed with lots of it but ended up with loads of new insights through thinking about what he was saying. Sometimes even a good TTW thread will do that if you can keep it troll-free for long enough!

So Revolution in the Head seems to be quite pro-Paul? You'd think he'd like it better! lol. But it seems it has some situations described that simply didn't happen, and that seems to have bothered him.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

@Charleneriva I almost carried out a blasphemous act there because we can't conclude a post about music without mentioning this GOAT song. Now can we @Poisoned Slice ?

Truer words have never been spoken.

 

[Charleneriva]

Thank you, I think I did read the George Martin book many years ago, but I didn't know about the Emerick one.

Not all all. Please give that book a chance. I'm sure most books are so available to you already.

Damn, can't believe I forgot to mention The Complete Beatles Recording Sessions: The Official Story of the Abbey Road Years 1962-1970 by Mark Lewisohn (with Paul's rare blessing ) but I guess you have read it already.

I agree the Macdonald book is opinionated (and Paul himself isn't that keen on it https://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/paul-mccartney-the-long-and-winding-q-a-20140717 ) but I like a book where I keep having to stop and think "Do I agree with this?" You end up much clearer about what you think and why. And it did an important job in dispelling the hackneyed old softie Paul image. I'm always surprised to see it's still around and it's depressing that it will probably never die.

Willaim Skidelsky did a book on Federer where I disagreed with lots of it but ended up with loads of new insights through thinking about what he was saying. Sometimes even a good TTW thread will do that if you can keep it troll-free for long enough!

Paul simply doesn't approve all Beatles books (there are thousands of them) except for a very few. Have you read Tune In? He doesn't approve that either and I have to agree with him, which is such a shame considering how ambitious (and super lengthy) that project is.

"I was there" / "They weren't there!" are his usual remarks, and I kind of agree, though I was guilty of "hoarding" Beatles books in the past myself, even this one (okay, I'm a bit embarrassed to admit that and didn't even finish it).

As for the dated and biased sentiments, I don't mind ignorance nearly as much as the illusion of knowledge.

Btw, if you half an hour to spare, here is a video of 550 artists choosing Paul or Paul over 10 years . Personally I feel it a bit disgusting (can't use a more "gentle" word) when people think or dismiss it's embarrassing to admit one prefers Paul - such absolute nonsense!

 

[Fedforever]

So Revolution in the Head seems to be quite pro-Paul? You'd think he'd like it better! lol. But it seems it has some situations described that simply didn't happen, and that seems to have bothered him.

It's tricky because Paul claims to have quite exact memories of things that happened but it's likely that they are not half as accurate as he thinks they are. Even in 1967 Hunter Davies claimed that their memories of the early days were quite hazy. So that's unlikely to have improved over time. Plus his perspective on events will change over time, as with all of us.

On the other hand, it must be downright weird to have so much of your life on permanent record and for so many strangers to have opinions on it. You can see why he would get cross at being effectively told he's "wrong" about the key events in his life.

 

[Fedforever]

Have you read Tune In? He doesn't approve that either

He doesn't like it? I assumed that was "unofficially authorised" as it were.

 

[Charleneriva]

Well to be honest I haven't listened much to Pink Floyd except Another brick in the wall(loved it) and maybe two more and that too a long time ago. Haven't listened to any songs of Deep Purple and The Who. My rock experience is very limited. A few songs of AC DC, Guns and Roses, Metallica, Beatles and that's pretty much it. I have listened to everything Led Zeppelin ever made though. They somehow seem very different to me than all the other rock greats.

It seems the majority came to know Pink Floyd from Another Brick in the Wall. Of course there's nothing wrong with that - all listeners and fans are welcome. It's just that album is one of the less "Pink Floyd sound".

Bolded: Are you sure you haven't missed all the bootleg recordings and stuff?

A lot of my favourite versions (LZ and in music in general) are from the low-profile or unofficial/obscure sources.

I like rock(other than Zeppelin) but only to the extent of listening to it when someone else finds a nice song for me. I never strive to look for it on the internet myself. More than Rock songs I like instrumental rock music better.
Ex:

Spoiler

(I'll use the spoiler because so many videos look messy)

It's okay. I don't mind the spoilers. I'm tempting to but will have to leave it until tomorrow to hear it. And I prefer instrumentals myself as well.

My preferred genre however is classical music. Music like this:

Spoiler

Also I can qualify as a fan of jazz, country songs and blues.
Other than that there's a load of Indian Music which you probably won't be familiar with.
Still if you want to explore it here's a piece. I will post an Indian Classical music and rock fusion piece so that you can relate better.

Spoiler

Another beautiful one is this:

Okay I really ike your broad music "taste" . I love classical, opera, jazz, rock, world music and all as well - sometimes it feels a bit overwhelming.

Again, gotta go now so will get back to you later on "your music".

And yes, I do LOVE fusion in general! Used to play jazz fusion quite a lot actually.

Pardon me for the big post. Then again if we don't get excited when talking music how well do we qualify as humans lol

Not at all. I always love enthusiasm. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Charleneriva]

He doesn't like it? I assumed that was "unofficially authorised" as it were.

I take it that you haven't read it? If you have, I'm sure you would get why.

 

[ak24alive]

Bolded: Are you sure you haven't missed all the bootleg recordings and stuff?

A lot of my favourite versions (LZ and in music in general) are from the low-profile or unofficial/obscure sources.

Lol by everything I meant a lot
Although I have listened to all the videos on YouTube and ofcourse all the studio albums and seen many live concert videos but I can't seriously claim to have watched all of Zeppelin.
I am 22. They were long done before I was even born.

 

[Sudacafan]

I would refer A Day in the Life more as a recording than a song, considering how heavily produced it is (in a good way of course) and the production is what makes that song/track more than the main tune itself imo.

Even though I most often use the word "song" for a melody with lyrics just like everybody does, in my mind I always distinguish clearly between a song/main tune and the recording or the production of it. In many cases there's not much a difference between them - you can strip down most or all the accompaniments and your perception of the song still remains the same - it still sounds just as good or even better.

In many other cases however, especially when the main tune is not that good/strong on its own, a good or not so good/bad production can take the song to a whole new level or shrink it down to a lower one. Believe me, you would likely find a lot of those in many popular songs, even in classical music/symphonies, if you pay a little bit attention.

A Day in the Life is no doubt a very popular choice amongst fans, largely thanks to the unique sonic experience it brings to the listeners imo (and to "the fifth Beatle" ) and I love it as well. But imo there is simply no "best Beatles song" - song vs recording aside, it's all subjective and most of all, doesn't matter, especially with a legendary and super prolific band like Beatles.

Each song moves or effects each listener in a different way. Catherine Holmes à Court, the daughter of Robert Holmes à Court, who acquired ATV’s holding company then sold the Beatles catalogue to Michael Jackson, was given a choice of having any Beatles song to her name, and she chose the much lower profile Penny Lane, not Yesterday, which was then the most popular and biggest royalty profitable one (currently still the fourth of all time). How lovely is that?

Not a fan of superlatives and since I love so many Beatles songs, I simply can't chose the best one. But I guess I can tell which song moves me the most - The Long and Winding Road.

Of course, I mean the stripped-down version on Anthology 3 or even better, the most intimate, minimal one on Let It Be.... Naked / Get Back sessions - my personal favourite.

Cheers to all Beatles fans and non-Beatles fans who love some of their songs.

Good points. Yes, the A Day in the Life concept is broader than that of a song itself. Agree with The Long and Winding Road as the most moving song of The Beatles.

 

[Charleneriva]

Lol by everything I meant a lot
Although I have listened to all the videos on YouTube and ofcourse all the studio albums and seen many live concert videos but I can't seriously claim to have watched all of Zeppelin.
I am 22. They were long done before I was even born.

Ahhh. So young. I love my 22. Hope you're loving yours.

 

[Northern]

Truer words have never been spoken.

 

[Phoenix1983]

Please.... The Beatles are eternal. Federer was/is a great tennis player who will retire in a few years and fade into obscurity outside of the sporting world. Who talks about Sampras or Connors anymore outside tennis forums?

As monumental as Federer is, I have to agree with you.

No sporting great - except maybe Muhammad Ali (and that won't only be because of his sporting prowess) will live on through the centuries like the Beatles and their music will.

 

[ak24alive]

As monumental as Federer is, I have to agree with you.

No sporting great - except maybe Muhammad Ali (and that won't only be because of his sporting prowess) will live on through the centuries like the Beatles and their music will.

Yeah well that's actually a characteristic of music and not particularly of the Beatles. No offence to the Beatles(they are brilliant) but its true that music and all the other forms of art live longer than people and names. Same can be said about sports. To many Federer is even bigger than tennis but the truth(bitter) is once our generation(any generation that witnessed Rog) is done Rog will be lost into the pages of history like all the other greats and tennis will live long.
So when we say that Beatles will live for centuries and Fed won't we must acknowledge the fact that Beatles aren't just a band playing music but they are music(which never dies) while Federer is just a man playing tennis and no matter how great he is, he is not tennis.

 

[Phoenix1983]

Yeah well that's actually a characteristic of music and not particularly of the Beatles. No offence to the Beatles(they are brilliant) but its true that music and all the other forms of art live longer than people and names. Same can be said about sports. To many Federer is even bigger than tennis but the truth(bitter) is once our generation(any generation that witnessed Rog) is done Rog will be lost into the pages of history like all the other greats and tennis will live long.
So when we say that Beatles will live for centuries and Fed won't we must acknowledge the fact that Beatles aren't just a band playing music but they are music(which never dies) while Federer is just a man playing tennis and no matter how great he is, he is not tennis.

I agree with you. Art in all its forms lives on much longer than those who created it, whereas once a sportsperson is done, they and their works will fade from memory (especially after all those who witnessed them play have passed on).

So be it.

 

[Your Hero]

I see A Day In The Life has been discussed. A great song no doubt but I would've done
it differently. They give away the great orchestral buildup in the middle which takes
away from its impact at the end. Sgt Pepper had ZERO backwards guitars. I'd have
filled those first 24 bars with something extremely weird and backwards-y. Then when
the buildup comes at the end your mind just gets totally blown the first time you
heard it. That's my 2 billion cents anyway......

 

[Mainad]

I see A Day In The Life has been discussed. A great song no doubt but I would've done
it differently. They give away the great orchestral buildup in the middle which takes
away from its impact at the end. Sgt Pepper had ZERO backwards guitars. I'd have
filled those first 24 bars with something extremely weird and backwards-y. Then when
the buildup comes at the end your mind just gets totally blown the first time you
heard it. That's my 2 billion cents anyway......

Clearly, you should have been the 5th Beatle!