The Beatles: Distinctly Average

[oaksoft]

2 hours ago, TPAFKATS said:

Dont know what music they are into, however from experience on this forum these PhD types appear to be cocks.

Why are you so easily triggered on almost every subject?

Now people PhDs have got you flustered? 

Take that enormous chip off your shoulder and try and enjoy life.

[oaksoft]

2 hours ago, Bud the Baker said:

Just finished watching The Secret Science Of Pop, a deconstruction of UK Chart History from BBC4 music. Introduced by Professor Armand Leroi a dude with a Ph.D in Evolutionary Biology who attempted to deconstruct songs to their essential components and produce a hit record.

One of the main findings was that to be successful then you have to be average - you might have to be close to/at the edge to get noticed but if you want a long career in pop you have to become average pdq - what was special about The Beatles is that they were average right from the start with songs like Love Me Do, unlike say The Kinks and You Really Got Me who were "out there".

In analysing the '70's he dismissed Punk as being musically irrelevant and said the most important song of the decade was Autobahn by Kraftwerk which lead to I Feel Love by Donna Summer as example of going from the edge to the mainstream ignoring IMO that the latter song was a fusion of Autobahn and The Great Gig In The Sky by Pink Floyd.

The '80's were also an irrelevance musically but he did reckon the emergence of House/Dance Music started then (and he said Cabaret Voltaire were important Mr. EAB). Grunge and Britpop were largely ignored as he tried to tried to convert an Adele style ballad by a Wedding Singer  called Nike Jemiyo into a dance track with the help of Trevor Horn.

********************

Interesting program but he didn't take into account the Tribal Nature of music, the Pretty Boy/Girll factor, really didn't examine that great acts/songs change the position of the mainstream in any depth and last but not least, the contrary nature of folk at times. A interesting but flawed program by a clever guy as he was unable to get Ms. Jemiyo onto Radio 1's playlist.

 

This guy is entitled to his opinion.

The more interesting question is why everyone is so triggered by the opinions of other people.

The guy is clearly wrong. Hilariously wrong.

Calling him names wont make him more or less wrong.

[oaksoft]

1 hour ago, pozbaird said:

A load of complete bollocks. I love The Beatles, my favourite song is 'She Said She Said' from 'Revolver'. I own 'Never Mind the Bollocks' and think it is one of the best albums of all time. I own the Firebird Suite by Stravinsky, love it. I have on my iPod 'Don't Stop Movin' by S Club 7 and think it is a wonderful upbeat pop song. I love the Spice Girls 'Two Become One' - the string arrangement is heavenly. I love Buddy Holly's 'Rave On'. Elvis Presley's 'One Night' sends a shiver down my spine. I love heavy rock bands like Stone Sour and Alter Bridge, country bands like Sugarland and Cross Canadian Ragweed, singer-songwriters like Brandi Carlile and Paul Kelly.

Who is best? Who is 'average'? Who is...

None of them. The guy is a twat, a grade one knobcheese.

One day you will post something which isnt full of venom.

Edited March 4, 2017 by oaksoft

[oaksoft]

1 hour ago, Bud the Baker said:

Like I said it was a flawed program mainly because he never fully explained what his algorithms were, just vague allusions to "beats per minute" and aggression within the music and factors like use of electric guitars, drum machines etc. However he had some points regarding say The Beatles who are remembered today more for their albums (where he & you agree) and later work than the hit singles from the "Moptop Period" - how often do Please, Please Me or I Feel Fine get mentioned today? 

Who is best - It was a program about Chart History so obviously The Beatles & Elvis with 17 No. 1 singles (apologies if this info is out of date).

Who is average - Like I said he never really fully explained it but he did show how certain factors/styles were dominant at various times and showed how Taylor Swift's work contained many of the factors prevalent in today's music.

I'd say he made a fair point about Autobahn being the most important song from the '70's with respect to it's subsequent influence on chart history.

To repeat myself it was a flawed program because it never really established the scientific basis by which pop success could be guaranteed (see poor Ms Jemiyo) and fell back upon anecdotal ramblings. There's no science to getting a hit single, it's still a matter of alchemy - same as it ever was!

*****************

In the end you like what you like and if you want a square go I'll meet you in that alley in Brighton where Phil Daniels shagged Leslie Ash - you name the time.

If he had gone into details of his algorithm people would have switched off.

He is of course wrong anyway because he is attempting to quantify music as an absolute thing whereas the value of music only exists when it interacts with each specific listener. For example some people hate punk. For others it defined their childhood. As such it is entirely subjective and his program is a waste of time.

Edited March 4, 2017 by oaksoft

[Bud the Baker]

1 minute ago, oaksoft said:

This guy is entitled to his opinion.

The more interesting question is why everyone is so triggered by the opinions of other people.

The guy is clearly wrong. Hilariously wrong.

Calling him names wont make him more or less wrong.

That's exactly it - it was just an opinion.

He never explained the algorithms other than vaguely and at the end his chosen singer didn't get on the Radio 1 playlist, never mind a chart topper!

Other than a "dude" which is not disparaging what name did I call him?

IMO interesting but still a failure.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08gk664

Quote

Evolutionary biologist Professor Armand Leroi believes data science can transform the pop world. He gathers a team of scientists and researchers to analyse over 50 years of UK chart music. Can algorithms find the secret to pop success?

When the results are in, Armand teams up with hit producer Trevor Horn. Using machine-learning techniques, Armand and Trevor try to take a song by unsigned artist Nike Jemiyo and turn it into a potential chart-topper.

Armand also takes a scientific look at pop evolution. He hunts for the major revolutions in his historic chart data, looking for those artists who transformed the musical landscape. The outcomes are fascinating and surprising, though fans of the Fab Four may not be pleased with the results. As Armand puts it, the hallmark of The Beatles is 'average'.

Finally, by teaming up with BBC research and development, Armand finds out if his algorithms can discover the stars of the future. Can he predict which of thousands of demo tracks uploaded to BBC Introducing is most likely to be a hit without listening to a note?

This is a clash of science and culture and a unique experiment with no guarantee of success. How will the artists react to the scientist intruding on their turf? And will Armand succeed in finding a secret science of pop?

 

[oaksoft]

1 minute ago, Bud the Baker said:

That's exactly it - it was just an opinion.

He never explained the algorithms other than vaguely and at the end his chosen singer didn't get on the Radio 1 playlist, never mind a chart topper!

Other than a "dude" which is not disparaging what name did I call him?

IMO interesting but still a failure.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08gk664

 

You didnt call him a name. I was having a go at those who did.

It seems to be the Scottish way. That when people say things you (third person) disagree with that instead of arguing the point name calling is resorted to.

[Bud the Baker]

6 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

If he had gone into details of his algorithm people would have switched off.

 

Not me.

Edited March 4, 2017 by Bud the Baker

[FTOF]

1 hour ago, Bud the Baker said:

The program was about Chart History and success - how many of the Punk bands mentioned had substantial chart success while remaining true to the Year Zero ethos?

You could argue that there were many more punk singles that had more chart success than Autobahn, and were therefore more influential than Autobahn.

As you've mentioned personal preference plays a big part in this type of matter. Also, "influence" isn't really quantifiable.

Anyway, my point still stands, in that punk music was not musically irrelevant in relation to chart success, if you look at the punk singles that charted and the subsequently successful bands that were formed in the 80's, like Simple Minds and Ultravox.

I also suspect you're a bit older than me, although not by much, as in looking at 1974 singles, I think I was probably listening to the likes of Slade, Mud, The Sweet and Suzi Quatro, as opposed to Kraftwerk.

Good discussion though.

Edited March 4, 2017 by FTOF

[oaksoft]

Just now, Bud the Baker said:

Not me  this is the first line of his blurb on the BBC website

I wanted to hear more about the details as otherwise it was just another guy rambling - without discussing the science it's just another persons anec

No and not me either. I would have been interested in watching that if I watched TV.

I hate watching "science" programmes because they inevtiably turn out to be dumbed down garbage. I have given up trying.

There seems to be no intention on behalf of the BBC to cater for those who want the hardcore maths and science behind all this stuff. They are too busy chasing ratings.

[oaksoft]

Had a quick look and he has published an article on this sort of stuff.

http://rsos.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/royopensci/2/5/150081.full.pdf

Perhaps instead of calling him a knobcheese, pozzy could attempt to dissect the actual science behind it.

[Dibbles old paperboy]

46 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

Again it all comes to definitions I'd have argued that by the time of Eleanor Rigby in August 1966 they were already on their final US tour in the wake of Lennon's "more popular than Jesus" remark. If I'd realized Paberback Writer was that late then I'd have said none. For arguments sake I'm defining Beatlemania in terms of their singles as being from Please, Please Me, to Help in mid-65. Neither of your picks fall into the "boy meets girl" category.

Tell ye what after poz had beaten me up down in Brighton you can have a few kicks at my prone body.

Ah, so The Beatles are average is you discount most of their career and overlook the fact that on the "Help!" album the first signals of the progression in their subject matter and recording techniques which would see them move away from the 1963-4 sounds and pop formula and move towards the experimentation of Revolver to Magical Mystery Tour period were already in evidence. All the band were taking pot and wanting to find ways of sonically conveying the experience of altered consciousness in their music (Ticket To Ride built around an unconventional hypnotic drum track and droning guitars which mostly stay on one chord for most of the song, see also Tell Me What You See), Lennon beginning to write autobiographical lyrics about his feelings (Help!) rather than boy-girl I Want To Hold Your Hand type songs, the first use of outside session musicians (You've Got To Hide Your Love Away and the string quartet on Yesterday), first recording on which the whole band are not featured in the recording (Yesterday, again).

Ticket To Ride b/w Yes It Is: UK No.1 single, April 1965

Help b/w I'm Down: UK No.1 single, summer 1965

Yesterday b/w Act Naturally: US No.1 single, October 1965

All recorded while making their second film in 12 months and selling out UK and US tours including dates like Hollywood Bowl and Shea Stadium. Like the professor said, all distinctly avaerage for a male pop vocal group of the period.

 

Edited March 4, 2017 by Dibbles old paperboy

[Bud the Baker]

50 minutes ago, FTOF said:

You could argue that there were many more punk singles that had more chart success than Autobahn, and were therefore more influential than Autobahn.

As you've mentioned personal preference plays a big part in this type of matter.

Anyway, my point still stands, in that punk music was not musically irrelevant in relation to chart success, if you look at the punk singles that charted and the subsequently successful bands that were formed in the 80's, like Simple Minds and Ultravox.

I also suspect you're a bit older than me, although not by much, as in looking at 1974 singles, I think I was probably listening to the likes of Slade, Mud, The Sweet and Suzi Quatro, as opposed to Kraftwerk.

Good discussion though.

No I'd have been listening to the same sorta stuff as you back in '74.

You'd have to watch the program but he reckoned their were only about 80 singles that you could define as being punk - he didn't mention it specifically but I guess he'd have been excluding the singles from The Pistols' Great Rock'n'Roll Swindle elpee. Also you (?) quoted Blondie as being part of the Punk Scene but their hit singles were mainly pop - their Parallel Lines elpee was produced by Glam Rock survivor Mike Chapman. The point being Blondie got noticed for being Punk but had success by being mainstream. Autobahn may not have been a hit in it's own right but I'd say it's been very influential on a lot of subsequent hits.

Simple Minds & Ultravox - I'd argue they were more influenced by Kraftwerk than The Pistols.

Prob'ly a few years older than you - my first single was Jeepster by T-Rex and elpee Slayed by Slade.

Edited March 4, 2017 by Bud the Baker

[pozbaird]

31 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

One day you will post something which isnt full of venom.

I don't like Venom. Diamond Head were OK, Saxon had some good tunes. I only like a few NWOBHM bands.

[pozbaird]

8 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Had a quick look and he has published an article on this sort of stuff.

http://rsos.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/royopensci/2/5/150081.full.pdf

Perhaps instead of calling him a knobcheese, pozzy could attempt to dissect the actual science behind it.

 

Anyone who tries to rate a band as 'average', tries to apply rules to music, is a knobcheese. You'll be familiar with the term. IMHO, he's a knobcheese. Now fcuk off back to my ignore list.

Edited March 4, 2017 by pozbaird

[Bud the Baker]

36 minutes ago, Dibbles old paperboy said:

Ah, so The Beatles are average is you discount most of their career and overlook the fact that on the "Help!" album the first signals of the progression in their subject matter and recording techniques which would see them move away from the 1963-4 sounds and pop formula and move towards the experimentation of Revolver to Magical Mystery Tour period were already in evidence. All the band were taking pot and wanting to find ways of sonically conveying the experience of altered consciousness in their music (Ticket To Ride built around an unconventional hypnotic drum track and droning guitars which mostly stay on one chord for most of the song, see also Tell Me What You See), Lennon beginning to write autobiographical lyrics about his feelings (Help!) rather than boy-girl I Want To Hold Your Hand type songs, the first use of outside session musicians (You've Got To Hide Your Love Away and the string quartet on Yesterday), first recording on which the whole band are not featured in the recording (Yesterday, again).

Ticket To Ride b/w Yes It Is: UK No.1 single, April 1965

Help b/w I'm Down: UK No.1 single, summer 1965

Yesterday b/w Act Naturally: US No.1 single, October 1965

 

I like The Beatles as much as you, have all the original material elpees released while they were together and a lot of those released subsequently Rarities, Anthologies, Remixes, I bought Live At The Hollywood Bowl when it was released on CD for the first time last year but I wouldn't say the three singles from '65 listed above are anything out of the mainstream for '65.

Help is still something they're doing with one eye on the charts - Rubber Soul (Are you reading EAB?) is where they start to do it for themelves.

Edited March 4, 2017 by Bud the Baker

[linwood buddie]

Since this mentions The Beatles , I signed up for that DeAgostini offer that's just started ,First issue is Abbey Road vinyl and a t-shirt £9.99.

[FTOF]

1 hour ago, Bud the Baker said:

No I'd have been listening to the same sorta stuff as you back in '74.

You'd have to watch the program but he reckoned their were only about 80 singles that you could define as being punk - he didn't mention it specifically but I guess he'd have been excluding the singles from The Pistols' Great Rock'n'Roll Swindle elpee. Also you (?) quoted Blondie as being part of the Punk Scene but their hit singles were mainly pop - their Parallel Lines elpee was produced by Glam Rock survivor Mike Chapman. The point being Blondie got noticed for being Punk but had success by being mainstream. Autobahn may not have been a hit in it's own right but I'd say it's been very influential on a lot of subsequent hits.

Simple Minds & Ultravox - I'd argue they were more influenced by Kraftwerk than The Pistols.

Prob'ly a few years older than you - my first single was Jeepster by T-Rex and elpee Slayed by Slade.

Think it was Poz that quoted Blondie. I agree that their chart singles certainly were not punk, but they were greatly influenced by 70's New York punk. Which incidentally, was driven by the likes of Lou Reed, Patti Smith , Iggy Pop and David Bowie.

As I'm sure you'll be aware Simple Minds started out as Johnny and the self abusers. Their only single "Saints and Sinners" certainly has the classic punk sound of the time, which the majority of punk bands picked up and developed into their own sound. I too don't think they were influenced by The Pistols as the Pistols were on a different path from Johnny and the self abusers and developed their own distinctive sound.

In addition to the groups I mentioned earlier, I listened to a right load of old mainstream shite in the 70's. The Osmonds by f**k! Although Crazy Horses is a magnificent tune.

I generally listened to my brothers punk singles, so didn't buy earlier punk.  Never Mind the bollocks was the first album I bought and either King Rocker (Generation X) or Sweet Suburbia (The Skids) was the first single of the genre that I actually bought.

Midge Ure was with PVC2 who again released a very early punk based single and I believe Midge Ure has expressed his regret that he turned down the lead singer role in the Sex Pistols.

[Bud the Baker]

1 hour ago, oaksoft said:

Had a quick look and he has published an article on this sort of stuff.

http://rsos.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/royopensci/2/5/150081.full.pdf

Perhaps instead of calling him a knobcheese, pozzy could attempt to dissect the actual science behind it.

Right so it's actually a study of the US charts from 1960-2010 and states the bleedin' obvious that as Jazz/Blues declined the frequency of H1 chord changes (their definition) associated with these choons did. too Likewise with funk & disco in between '67 & 77 there was a doubling of H3 chord changes and as HM hit the US charts in the early '80's an increase in H6 chord changes - so far, like I said so bleedin' obvious.

***********************

The paper identifies three key periods of change

1964 - The British Invasion: The report tries to downplay this effect saying it was just a continuation of existing trends

Quote

As noted above, around 1964, many styles were changing in frequency; many principal components of the topic frequencies show linear changes in this period too. Inspection of the first four PCs shows that their evolutionary trajectories were all established before 1964, implying that, whereas the British may have contributed to this revolution, they could not have been entirely responsible for it

and

Quote

The songs of these bands have (low) values that anticipate the Hot 100’s trajectory: for these musical attributes, they were literally ahead of the curve. In the case of PC3 and PC4, their songs resemble the rest of the Hot 100: for these musical attributes they were merely on-trend. Together these results suggest that even if the British did not initiate the American revolution of 1964, they did exploit it and, to the degree that they were imitated by other artists, fanned its flames.

I'd say this misses the key point in that it was the fusion of styles by these British acts who then took the music back across the water which lead to this revolution.

1983 - A decrease in musical diversity with the charts being dominated by Disco (surely 6 years too late, even by their own analysis of H3 chord changes), New Wave & Hard Rock.

Quote

The decline in topic diversity and disparity in the early 1980s is due to a decline of timbral rather than harmonic diversity. In the early 1980s timbral topics T1 (drums, aggressive, percussive) and T5 (guitar, loud, energetic) become increasingly dominant; the subsequent recovery of diversity is due to the relative decrease in frequency of the these topics as T3 (energetic, speech, bright) increases. Put in terms of styles, the decline of diversity is due to the dominance of genres such as NEW WAVE, DISCO, HARDROCK  its recovery is due to their waning with the rise of RAP and related genres. Contrary to current theories of musical evolution then we find no evidence for the progressive homogenization of music in the charts and little sign of diversity cycles within the 50 year time frame of our study. Instead, the evolution of chart diversity is dominated by historically unique events: the rise and fall of particular ways of making music.
 

1991 - The emergence of Rap and related genres (?) as a dominant factor in the charts leading to an increase in musical diversity according to the report.

********************

An interesting read for an anorak such as myself even if I don't agree with a lot of what it says. It doesn't really support the TV programs claim that there is a science to making successful pop music - it remains a dark art.

[antrin]

2 hours ago, oaksoft said:

.

There seems to be no intention on behalf of the BBC to cater for those who want the hardcore maths and science behind all this stuff. They are too busy chasing ratings.

Ever heard of Radio 4?

Science Programmes, Infinite Monkey Cage, Analysis...

Then there's the Open University?

"They are too busy chasing ratings."

Most tv channels/programmes are aimed at (as they're consumed by) the majority of the population.  Whenever anyBuddie has a smidgin of insider knowledge on any subject it renders a tv programme less than satisfactory.... flawed for him/her.

So tv can't always cater for such smart-arses.  Doing so would make it impenetrable for everyone else.

You need to learn how to chill out. 

[Bud the Baker]

4 minutes ago, antrin said:

Ever heard of Radio 4?

Science Programmes, Infinite Monkey Cage, Analysis...

Then there's the Open University?

"They are too busy chasing ratings."

Most tv channels/programmes are aimed at (as they're consumed by) the majority of the population.  Whenever anyBuddie has a smidgin of insider knowledge on any subject it renders a tv programme less than satisfactory.... flawed for him/her.

So tv can't always cater for such smart-arses.  Doing so would make it impenetrable for everyone else.

You need to learn how to chill out. 

Unfortunately chill-out music has yet to make a significant impact on the US charts..........

 

[Bud the Baker]

22 minutes ago, FTOF said:

Midge Ure was with PVC2 who again released a very early punk based single and I believe Midge Ure has expressed his regret that he turned down the lead singer role in the Sex Pistols.

Midge Ure - Rutherglen's No.1 guitarist.  I remember his "Bay City Roller" period, and he was in Thin Lizzy FFS! I guess you just have to admire his gallusness!

 

[antrin]

2 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

Unfortunately chill-out music has yet to make a significant impact on the US charts..........

 

Hmmm.  chill-out?

 

I found that particularly irritating and windy-up!

 

Music AND cartoon.

[oaksoft]

2 hours ago, pozbaird said:

 

Anyone who tries to rate a band as 'average', tries to apply rules to music, is a knobcheese. You'll be familiar with the term. IMHO, he's a knobcheese. Now fcuk off back to my ignore list.

I thnk that is for the best. Quite honestly you have nothing constructive to offer the forum these days.

I don't know what is wrong with you these days and frankly I don't care.

[oaksoft]

48 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

Right so it's actually a study of the US charts from 1960-2010 and states the bleedin' obvious that as Jazz/Blues declined the frequency of H1 chord changes (their definition) associated with these choons did. too Likewise with funk & disco in between '67 & 77 there was a doubling of H3 chord changes and as HM hit the US charts in the early '80's an increase in H6 chord changes - so far, like I said so bleedin' obvious.

***********************

The paper identifies three key periods of change

1964 - The British Invasion: The report tries to downplay this effect saying it was just a continuation of existing trends

and

I'd say this misses the key point in that it was the fusion of styles by these British acts who then took the music back across the water which lead to this revolution.

1983 - A decrease in musical diversity with the charts being dominated by Disco (surely 6 years too late, even by their own analysis of H3 chord changes), New Wave & Hard Rock.

1991 - The emergence of Rap and related genres (?) as a dominant factor in the charts leading to an increase in musical diversity according to the report.

********************

An interesting read for an anorak such as myself even if I don't agree with a lot of what it says. It doesn't really support the TV programs claim that there is a science to making successful pop music - it remains a dark art.

I think there is definitely science in there but I am not persuaded that this guy has captured it at all.

Haven't read the full article though.

[Bud the Baker]

29 minutes ago, antrin said:

Music AND cartoon.

There used to be a poster on the site called Bluto, whatever happened to him?