The Beatles and the Eagles

jtindle

Member
Messages
1,301
I don't know if I can explain this correctly but it seems to me that the Beatles and The Eagles music was more perfect than any others. What I mean is, especially when listening to isolated tracks, you may hear one certain guitar sporadically throughout the song, but only a few strums during certain parts of the song. And it repeats when it gets back to that same part/parts. But there may be 3 or 4 different guitar parts like this. It's like the music was written out before hand for each instrument. It's so different from Zep or Cream or many others. Not saying its not as good, just different.
 

2HBStrat

Senior Member
Messages
41,244
Those two bands should not be in the same title in my view.
Agreed! The Eagles are okay, but The Beatles are the best ever imo, so, not a fair comparison. But I get your point, OP, their songs were arranged where some bands just didn't do that, so I get it.
 

DWB1960

Senior Member
Messages
21,996
It's so different from Zep or Cream or many others.
Cream, I agree, But Page was meticulous with arrainging multiple guitar parts to compliment each other.

The Song Remains the Same and Ten Years Gone being the most obvious examples. Stairway to Heaven too.
 

2HBStrat

Senior Member
Messages
41,244
Cream, I agree, But Page was meticulous with arrainging multiple guitar parts to compliment each other.

The Song Remains the Same and Ten Years Gone being the most obvious examples. Stairway to Heaven too.
Page's interwoven guitar tracks are all over LZ albums. He was definitely the master of the studio.
 

jtindle

Member
Messages
1,301
Cream, I agree, But Page was meticulous with arrainging multiple guitar parts to compliment each other.

The Song Remains the Same and Ten Years Gone being the most obvious examples. Stairway to Heaven too.

I'm referring more to how one guitar might play 2 strums in the middle of the verse and you won't hear that guitar again until the 2 strums in the middle of the next verse. It makes me envision watching an orchestra of guitars, basses and drums and one guitars player sits through the song doing nothing until his 2 strums in the middle of the verse and then he sits there until his part comes up again next verse.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Messages
23,963
Those two bands should not be in the same title in my view.
I agree.

The Beatles were Sui Generis - there's never been a band like them before, and there hasn't been one since and never will be.

The Eagles are a sort of Formulaic Product that's impeccably choreographed and flawlessly presented and I have immense respect and love for Bernie Leadon and Timmy Schmidt and Joe Walsh, and I think JD Souther and Jackson Browne are fantastic, but there's way more Form than Substance in the core of what the band is just ....missing.
 

jtindle

Member
Messages
1,301
This is not a "who is better" thread, not even close. It's about song structure and I've noticed there 2 bands, more than any others that I recall, has more of an orchestral formula to their music.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Messages
23,963
This is not a "who is better" thread, not even close. It's about song structure and I've noticed there 2 bands, more than any others that I recall, has more of an orchestral formula to their music.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Look, the Eagles sold a tremendous number of records and Henley and Frey made a serious boatload of money, but I can think of 30 bands more orchestral than are the Eagles. You know, in some ways the Eagles got the "perfection" part just so, they just lack the heart and soul.

If you like, the Eagles are the "bestest" or whatever but I feel empty listening to them. And, it basically pisses me off because I know there's some incredibly talented, beloved musicians here and I feel their talent was not truly appreciated by the Ringmasters whose names I mentioned above.
 

jtindle

Member
Messages
1,301
Dude, I'm not even an Eagles fan. I own zero Eagles CD's. I own zero Beatles CD's. I can think of 20 or more bands I like better than these two. And I'm not saying they are better than anyone else because they sound orchestral. This is just something I've noticed over the years listening to their songs on the radio and YouTube.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Jp2558

Senior Member
Messages
2,606
IMO the Beatles mistakes are better than the Eagles perfected - and I do like the Eagles! But the Beatles were so much better due to their grueling early in their career touring schedule. They could play around their mistakes and easily recover, whereas the Eagles, well let's just say Don and Glen have sh1tfits when a live performance has any mistakes - which they rarely do.
 

80tiger

Platinum Supporting Member
Messages
1,426
Dunno, to each his own. I prefer (gasp) Eagles any day, although I dig the Beatles, too. But if I'm choosing a playlist, it'll be ten to one for the Eagles. I also get the OP comments about the guilts playing diff parts. Very similar to orchestral playing and I played professionally in multiple symphonies. Prolly are other bands that do that. Didn't the Beatles just add strings to a lot of their songs. I don't get a sense with one rhythm and one lead guitar of the orchestral sense of the band except adding instruments.
 

sideman

Member
Messages
2,363
Interesting comparison - probably the two biggest selling bands in rock history. To my mind the Beatles were more diverse, as their material evolved dramatically during their early big decade. More sophisticated musical and narrative content too. When the Eagles had their decade -- roughly following the Beatles -- I didn't think much of it at the time, but have come to admire the material. On the one hand, the Eagles were kind of like a latter day Beach Boys, irresistible, sweet chord combinations and melodies, Americana lyrics about lonely highways, pickup trucks and heartache -- yeah, almost formulaic. With great vocal harmonies and bridges too (like the Beatles). Yet after Joe Walsh came on board, the music wasn't always so candy like and vapid ("Take it Easy" and "Peaceful Easy Feeling"). Hotel California is one of the biggest rock songs (and albums) in history for a good reason -- although who the h knows what that song's lyrics are about. The chords and guitar parts are excellent. Walsh brings some funk and James Gang push to other material, like Life in the Fast Lane. I like the Eagles when Walsh is on electric guitar a lot - he gives them oxygen and makes them a major rock, rather than a soft rock, band. Both the Eagles and the Beatles excel at vocal harmonies, which are a major factor in most of their biggest hits, and song writing. The 60s were far more tumultuous than the 70s, which may help explain why the Beatles music evolved so much from early love songs to consciousness raising, sitar infested sometimes weirdness. The 70s were more placid and less interesting. The Eagles arguably stay truer to the American soul - not going in for LSD (cocaine and vodka yes) and Eastern mysticism. Some thoughts.
 

xjojox

Tardis-dwelling wanker
Messages
5,741
Interesting comparison - probably the two biggest selling bands in rock history. To my mind the Beatles were more diverse, as their material evolved dramatically during their early big decade. More sophisticated musical and narrative content too. When the Eagles had their decade -- roughly following the Beatles -- I didn't think much of it at the time, but have come to admire the material. On the one hand, the Eagles were kind of like a latter day Beach Boys, irresistible, sweet chord combinations and melodies, Americana lyrics about lonely highways, pickup trucks and heartache -- yeah, almost formulaic. With great vocal harmonies and bridges too (like the Beatles). Yet after Joe Walsh came on board, the music wasn't always so candy like and vapid ("Take it Easy" and "Peaceful Easy Feeling"). Hotel California is one of the biggest rock songs (and albums) in history for a good reason -- although who the h knows what that song's lyrics are about. The chords and guitar parts are excellent. Walsh brings some funk and James Gang push to other material, like Life in the Fast Lane. I like the Eagles when Walsh is on electric guitar a lot - he gives them oxygen and makes them a major rock, rather than a soft rock, band. Both the Eagles and the Beatles excel at vocal harmonies, which are a major factor in most of their biggest hits, and song writing. The 60s were far more tumultuous than the 70s, which may help explain why the Beatles music evolved so much from early love songs to consciousness raising, sitar infested sometimes weirdness. The 70s were more placid and less interesting. The Eagles arguably stay truer to the American soul - not going in for LSD (cocaine and vodka yes) and Eastern mysticism. Some thoughts.
Agree.....except Walsh would be the first to tell you that Felder is the one who kicked the Eagles out of the country rock doldrums. Walsh just completed the circle. I love both of those guys, both fine players...but Felder is the one who got that ball rolling and was the more sophisticated musician of the two (which Walsh has also pointed out many times).

It is a bit of an unfair comparison. The Beatles were...the Beatles. They changed the pop landscape whereas the Eagles were more product. I do think that folks of a certain age do gush a bit too profusely over the Beatles though. Right place right time, staggering success, and suddenly unlimited budget to indulge, as well as a bully pulpit to have everything listened to and analyzed with way too much deference for the rest of their lives (even some awful stuff truth be known). But still arguably the most signicant act in pop/rock history. The Eagles, as has been mentioned, were noteworthy more for craft then for art, and were one of the first bands to create the stereotype of overly slick LA production values. Personally I was never comfortable with the idea of slagging artists just for having high production and performance standards...

Lots of acts use the studio to orchestrate well. I get what the OP is getting at, but with a broader listening palette I suspect he's find more examples.
 

TNJ

Gold Supporting Member
Messages
28,837
I think Henley was a force of nature with a voice for the ages.
Good lyricist too.
Socially conscious, etc.
Was he on Lennon or McCartney's level wrt any measure of musical genius?
Hardly, but really...who is?

I dig both bands equally for entirely different reasons.

YMMV,

S.
j
 

sinasl1

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
8,909
I think Henley was a force of nature with a voice for the ages.
Good lyricist too.
Socially conscious, etc.
Was he on Lennon or McCartney's level wrt any measure of musical genius?
Hardly, but really...who is?

I dig both bands equally for entirely different reasons.

YMMV,

S.
j

Don writes some incredible lyrics, world class, I think. For me, I don't know if it gets much better than Desperado or End Of The Innocence... New York Minute... They are perfect songs I think. He's a force of nature for sure.
 

Ferret

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
1,903
Dude, I'm not even an Eagles fan. I own zero Eagles CD's. I own zero Beatles CD's. I can think of 20 or more bands I like better than these two. And I'm not saying they are better than anyone else because they sound orchestral. This is just something I've noticed over the years listening to their songs on the radio and YouTube.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Some people might be missing your point but others are simply strongly disagreeing with you. For intricacy and sophistication of arrangement there is the whole symphonic rock sub-genre or prog to consider. To mention the Beatles in connection with the best of these bands is probably accurate. But the Eagles subtlety comes across to many as simply slick and expertly tradesman-like whereas the Beatles and the best prog bands were inspired.
 

Ferret

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
1,903
The Eagles arguably stay truer to the American soul - not going in for LSD (cocaine and vodka yes) and Eastern mysticism.
It is a bit odd for an English band not to even attempt to stay true to the American soul, whatever that is.
 






Top