ITT

listen to more music

>made the genre more mainstream and revolutionized music for that.
So proving OP right.

Freak Out is just blues rock with le epic zangy whacky lyrics about the government and drugs
Zappa was a pretentious hack who only made music to stroke his fragile ego

Today nobody would fucking remember Freak Out if it wasnt for sgt peppers.

and sgt peppers is just pop

would anybody remember tesla if it wasn't for edison? absolutely

The last two sides of the album are certainly not 'just blues rock'.

Its difficult to find it experimental if youre not looking at it from the context of all the pop music before it (which we can't) and if not looking from the context that many of the things they did to get the sounds on it are things they both invented and had to do mechanically. These days all the weird sounds effects beatles used are normal and cn be done at the click of a button.

Tbh even today, wtf is an experimental album? there isnt really anything new that hasnt been done before and can be truly counted as novel or experimental.

From the 80s, rock music stopped being experimental and things just repeated themselves. Any real music progression was in other areas of pop music. Really what is experimental now is just people who are too pretentious and snooty to like nice sounding music and so want to listen to obscure music no one else listens to and then pretend its experimental.

She's Leaving Home and Lucy in sky With Diamonds sounded like every other hit song on the radio at the time
geez you're so right user

You are right, even Light My Fire by The Doors (which wasn't recorded with a multimillionaire budget over the course of six months in 1966) is even more of a psychedelic and rock song than those you mentioned, and hit the billboard with more success than any of Sgt. Peppers stuff

>is even more of a psychedelic and rock song than those you mentioned
Who the fuck mentioned psychedelic rock?

Imagine caring if something is “experimental” or not.

>imagine coming to a music board to discuss the merits of certain music

Yeah that’s what I’m doing right now

As much as I like Freak Out. It doesn’t hold as much merit as you might think it does

We were talking about pop music, which is what the beatles made, you said every other hit on the radio didn't sound like it at the time, I agreed with that stating that the most successful Light My Fire was a psychedelic rock song at heart without the pretention to be an avant garde composition

Says a lot about sgt peppers

In what way?

>The truth is that although it was declared an "experimental" work, even Sgt. Pepper managed to remain a pop album. The Beatles of 1967 were still producing three-minute ditties, while Red Crayolas and Pink Floyd, to name two psychedelic bands of the era, were playing long free form suites - at times cacophonous, often strictly instrumental - that bordered on avantgarde. In 1967, the band that had never recorded a song that had not been built around a refrain began to feel outdated. They tried to keep up, but they never pushed themselves beyond the jingles, most likely because they could not, just as Marilyn Monroe could not have recited Shakespeare.

>Sgt. Pepper is the album of a band that sensed change in the making, and was adapting its style to the taste of the hippies. It came in last (in June), after Velvet Underground & Nico (January), The Doors (also January), the Byrds' Younger Than Yesterday (february), and the Jefferson Airplane's Surrealistic Pillow (February) to signal the end of an era, after others had forever changed the history of rock music. (Several technical "innovations" on Sgt Pepper were copied from Younger Than Yesterday, whose tapes the Beatles had heard from David Crosby at the end of 1966). The uproar generated by Sgt. Pepper transferred those innovations from the US underground to the living rooms and the supermarkets of half the world.

Attached: 2_10.png (1040x1035, 1.09M)

Freak Out took 3-4 days to record, recorded within the sceptic eyes of a record company, limited sessions, a modest budget by a new and upcoming band, and still managed to record a debut double LP (something really ballsy, even for today's standards)

McCartney spent the rest of 1966 listening to Freak Out and convinced himself that he wanted to do an equivalent with his band, an ambitious double LP but with the (Beach Boys inspired) obsession of George Martin's refined studio production methods. It took more than 4 months to record, a fortune to produce and it still didn't caught the impact Freak Out had upon arrival in the music scene. The Beatles recorded Sgt Peppers only after the radio, clubs and concerts started to publicly accept long psychedelic plays, they did so with a multi-millionaire budget, being the priority of tens of producers and their entire record label.

Exactly. People don’t realise that the Beatles were very influenced by acts such as Frank Zappa, AMM, Beach Boys and Stockhausen which led to Sgt Peppers becoming the “most influential” record of all time

what about revolver

Honestly even scaruffi agrees with you.If you read the entire beatles essay you'll see that he considers them very relevant for music for their role in inspiring nuclear shitloads of young men to make a band,people start bands because they liked the beatles even nowadays.

This man is too based.

>This man is too based.

Attached: soy186 (2).png (406x431, 16.82K)

seething

Beatles made interesting art pop music the mainstream. art is naturally countercultural though so its natural the art scene the beatles turned their back on them like judas. the beatles influence waned very quickly precisely becaause they were so influential as to be shunned by people.

Attached: nooooo.png (1115x704, 646.32K)

>seething

Attached: 1584830200391.jpg (644x800, 45.95K)

>pop
>being for the benefit of mr kite
>within you without you
>lovely rita
>a day in the life
no.

Yes, it's ultimately pop music disguised with production tricks so people like you fall in the "experimental" cheat, much like radiohead has done since 1997

what is the pop part of within you without you

Attached: 91dHRGIV65L._SL1500_.jpg (1500x1500, 856.64K)

All of it. Don’t be fooled by Indian instruments playing a normal pop song you retard

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 201.77K)

I don't think you understand. It WAS experimental.

>it made the genre more mainstream and revolutionized music for that.
Just like Innerspeaker

Attached: 7ea586f7.jpg (600x600, 141.65K)

>normal pop song
where's the hook? is there a bridge? does it have a strong chorus? its pretty much just some indian classic with singing following the melody. the most it has in relation with a pop song is that is has a strong melody. you can shout buzzwords all day but it has to have something to back it up

BASED
youtu.be/jPGkJabeib0

This shit was so basic I have no clue why people call it "art pop".

Attached: wwfawdwg.png (595x558, 298.62K)

You an only possibly think Sgt Peppers wasn't experimental, if you know nothing about the recording techniques of the album.

Nobody thinks this is experimental

The industry pushes for it and clueless avant-teens fall for it

Attached: image.png (953x541, 409.2K)

>production tricks
I think you mean experimentation.

Attached: 1586037370331.jpg (600x600, 41.09K)

George Martin knew how to mask The Beatles limitations really well, but even he was just simply following year-old trends at a time where rock music was moving by the day

not true btw

you have no idea what avant-teen means, newfaggot

NIGGAS ON THE MOOOOON
Yes. Only id say their most experimental was exmilitary because at that point it was entirely new. Niggas on the moon is great, but it doesnt stray super far from the already established death grips sound.

His fans do

That man is so autistic

George Martin was -unlike the beatles- an experimentation genius and a sound engineering savant.
There's still no one even close,he must have been some kind of next level autist