Sgt.Peppers.... too dated?

[grooveman]

If you were around in the 60's and witnessed The Beatles incredible musical progression, over their rather short existance as a band. You'd probably appreciate Sgt. Pepper a lot more. IMO.....it was one of The Beatles greatest musical achievements. It always had a touch of nostalgia, using brass band sounds, 20's barrel house piano etc., With almost an intential non-rock feel used on several tracks.

Remember....the album was originally intended to be about their childhood and Mccartney wanted The Beatles to play and think of themselves as "another band", with total artistic control. I think they accomplished this and in turn reinvented themselves, and the art of making a record album in general. Something that The Beatles really needed to do at the time, in order to keep cutting edge, unpredictable and to continue their musical evolution.

So maybe by intentially giving the album a nostalgic feel, with a healthy dose of psychadelia added. Sgt. Pepper might seem some what dated and a period piece. Making it less contemporary sounding, than the band's other albums, to some listeners. It's still in my top 5 Beatles LPs. But RS, Revolver, White Album and Abbey Road are ahead of it.

 

[Lil' Brian]

Nothing against Sgt. Pepper here but when I'm in a Beatles mood I tend to grab The Beatles "Unsurpassed Masters" Vol. 1 (1962-63) and "Unsurpassed Masters Vol. 2 ( 1964-65). I believe there are 7 volumes in total. Most here are probably familiar but they're live in the studio takes really capturing the band for me. Recently listened again after hearing Bob Dylan's new song about Lennon.

 

[spaceman]

I think for a lot of us 50-somethings, we saw the Beatles change the world, & we appreciated their music to varying degrees, but it just wasn't really "our" music. It was our older siblings' music, and we kinda liked it, but it didn't really "fit" us. :scratch2: We were more of the Pink Floyd & Led Zeppelin era, with some overlap of the later Beatles. In other words, I like the Beatles a lot, but they're no Pink Floyd. (ducks to avoid thrown objects.)

 

[Lil' Brian]

As you can probably imagine, I'm all about The Rolling Stones "Their Satanic Majesties Request" when this topic comes up. Many will reject it as a Sgt. Pepper ripoff but there are several songs on it I really like still, "Citadel", "2000 Man", "She's a Rainbow", and "2000 Light Years from Home". If you add the extras, "We Love You" and "Dandelion" it's done but maybe that's just me.

 

[spaceman]

Yeah, but the Stones were really just the anti-Beatles, weren't they? Just messin' with ya.

 

[dr*audio]

I think for a lot of us 50-somethings, we saw the Beatles change the world, & we appreciated their music to varying degrees, but it just wasn't really "our" music. It was our older siblings' music, and we kinda liked it, but it didn't really "fit" us. :scratch2: We were more of the Pink Floyd & Led Zeppelin era, with some overlap of the later Beatles. In other words, I like the Beatles a lot, but they're no Pink Floyd. (ducks to avoid thrown objects.)

Without Sgt. Pepper there would be no Pink Floyd - "DSOTM."
P.S. I am a 50 something and I was 7 when I heard "Please, Please Me" on the radio and I was hooked from there on. It was very much my music, although my older brother liked them, too.

 

[Tom Brennan]

As you can probably imagine, I'm all about The Rolling Stones "Their Satanic Majesties Request" when this topic comes up. Many will reject it as a Sgt. Pepper ripoff but there are several songs on it I really like still, "Citadel", "2000 Man", "She's a Rainbow", and "2000 Light Years from Home". If you add the extras, "We Love You" and "Dandelion" it's done but maybe that's just me.

I thought that was a terrible record and whereas Pepper's was a sincere showing of where the Beatle's heads were at the time I think Satanic is just the Stones jumping on the psychedelic bandwagon; I don't think their hearts were in it, it just wasn't them, thank God. Keith Richards and Charlie Watts playing "Dandelion"?!?

 

[Tom Brennan]

Without Sgt. Pepper there would be no Pink Floyd - "DSOTM."

Reason enough then to rue Sgt. Pepper's.

 

[grooveman]

I'm 57 and grew up with The Beatles music during the 60's. I was bought all of their albums as they were released.....lucky kid I guess! If it wasn't for their albums like Sgt. Pepper, I probably wouldn't have gotten interested in more progressive bands like Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin among many others in the 70's. Several of these type of bands were probably inspired to experiment in their own creative style, due to Sgt. Pepper.

 

[Tom Brennan]

I think that Hendrix’ Electric Ladyland has withstood the test of time better. It is as relevant today as it was 43 years ago and has proven to be more than equal to Sgt Pepper artistically and influentially.

Ladyland has some great songs but also shows Hendrix losing his focus and self confidence and starting the aimless noodling that marked his late career. The first two Experience albums were tight and tough and show Hendrix at his best as an exciting Rock and Roll showman with a great band. The Experience was one of the best live acts I saw.

 

[Tom Brennan]

If you were around in the 60's and witnessed The Beatles incredible musical progression.......

An thoughtful and interesting post.

 

[ssmith3046]

I still play my Parlophone mono first pressing. Still a classic for me.

 

[Lil' Brian]

I thought that was a terrible record and whereas Pepper's was a sincere showing of where the Beatle's heads were at the time I think Satanic is just the Stones jumping on the psychedelic bandwagon; I don't think their hearts were in it, it just wasn't them, thank God. Keith Richards and Charlie Watts playing "Dandelion"?!?

Hi Tom. As predicted, TSMR will get a reaction! Btw, in the Stones trading circles there's a huge bootleg (8cds?) called "The TSMR Sessions" that demonstrates throughout that the album is clearly driven by Keith and Charlie (as most of their catalog). True story. That one'd drive you up a wall for sure.

 

[superdog]

If you were around in the 60's and witnessed The Beatles incredible musical progression, over their rather short existance as a band. You'd probably appreciate Sgt. Pepper a lot more. IMO.....it was one of The Beatles greatest musical achievements. It always had a touch of nostalgia, using brass band sounds, 20's barrel house piano etc., With almost an intential non-rock feel used on several tracks.

Remember....the album was originally intended to be about their childhood and Mccartney wanted The Beatles to play and think of themselves as "another band", with total artistic control. I think they accomplished this and in turn reinvented themselves, and the art of making a record album in general. Something that The Beatles really needed to do at the time, in order to keep cutting edge, unpredictable and to continue their musical evolution.

So maybe by intentially giving the album a nostalgic feel, with a healthy dose of psychadelia added. Sgt. Pepper might seem some what dated and a period piece. Making it less contemporary sounding, than the band's other albums, to some listeners. It's still in my top 5 Beatles LPs. But RS, Revolver, White Album and Abbey Road are ahead of it.

Pretty good analysis.I always felt it was a masterpiece of 60s rock.For the reasons you have given about the making of the lp it perhaps worked for them at the time but not after a lengthy period of time has elapsed.
Oddly enough some of Jimi Hendrix material can sound dated also but for the most part I still find it very listenable(not Purple Haze though).
Spacemans theory of being outside of its time frame is possible although Hendrix was out of my time frame but I absolutely love most of his material.

 

[Tom Brennan]

..... that demonstrates throughout that the album is clearly driven by Keith and Charlie (as most of their catalog). True story. That one'd drive you up a wall for sure.

Well I'll be damned.

When that record came out I bought it and really tried to like it, I was a big Stones fan and preferred them to the Beatles by far. But I had to give up on the thing.

Looking back at both bands I now prefer the Beatles songs in which McCartney sings like Little Richard to any of the other work by either band. In retrospect even though Paul wrote many of the sappiest Beatles songs I realize he was also the most fierce rocker in the band.

 

[superdog]

Ladyland has some great songs but also shows Hendrix losing his focus and self confidence and starting the aimless noodling that marked his late career. The first two Experience albums were tight and tough and show Hendrix at his best as an exciting Rock and Roll showman with a great band. The Experience was one of the best live acts I saw.

Ooh how I envy you.Seeing the early Experience is at the top of my all time wish list.As much as I like EL I think AYE and ABL are tighter.

 

[grooveman]

Hi Tom. As predicted, TSMR will get a reaction! Btw, in the Stones trading circles there's a huge bootleg (8cds?) called "The TSMR Sessions" that demonstrates throughout that the album is clearly driven by Keith and Charlie (as most of their catalog). True story. That one'd drive you up a wall for sure.

An 8 CD set of Satanic Sessions! Count me in! Is it available on vinyl...lol? Even though it's been dissed over the years. I personally enjoy this venture into psychadelia by The Stones. It holds some fond memories for me. Got it for Xmas 67' along with Magical Mystery Tour! IMO.....it's improved with age. The mono US pressing is a must have!

 

[Tom Brennan]

Ooh how I envy you.Seeing the early Experience is at the top of my all time wish list.As much as I like EL I think AYE and ABL are tighter.

The Jimi Hendrix Experience wax a great act. Redding was the anchor, he played simple and hard driving bass that allowed Mitchell and Hendrix the freedom to go off on tangents. But the tangents were short and came back on point precisely, BANG! Oh, that was one Hell of a band.

They would've been great with a horn section like the one at Stax, much of what the Experience played was juiced up Soul Music; Little Miss Lover for instance.

 

[kconnor]

I realize this thread is about Sgt. Pepper and I don’t want to derail it but I have to respond.
Personally, I find no indication of aimless noodling marring Electric Ladyland. The layout of EL was the exact opposite of the Chaz Chandler four minute pop structured songs of Are You Experienced and Axis. It was also full of strange stacked harmonies that actually work very well. In combination those things might be a bit off putting to those who prefer the formulated production of the first two albums. As Jimi has said when asked about that album, to paraphrase him, we are not just fooling around here; everything on that album is there for a purpose. I also think the assertion that Electric Ladyland suffered from Jimi’s reported musical ADHD later on is invalid because according to Chaz Chandler, there was no or Axis or Electric Ladyland phases. He said that the groundwork for each of those albums was laid concurrently. Axis overlaid Experienced, Ladyland overlaid Axis. Though the finishing touches were done at Electric Lady studios later on.

 

[KrisM]

Personal taste is going to play into it. My girlfriend retreats to "Aja" when she's in a bad mood. "Aja" puts me in IN a bad mood. I'm too young to have witnessed Sgt Peppers when it was fresh, so it always sounded dated to me. But that doesn't explain my distaste for it (I've never made it through the whole album in one sitting). I can listen to Odessey and Oracle all day, though it's also obviously a product of its time.

But that's just my view. If somebody loves Sgt. Peppers...then who am I to disagree? I'm surprised, though, that so many in this thread seem to feel indifferent as well. It was always one of those things that I was told that I HAD to like. So maybe that's why I don't like it. Unlike that Zombie's album that I mentioned, Sgt Pepper's just sounds like a mess to me, all over the place. Without the context of having lived through the '60s, I can only listen to it out of context, out of any sort of frame of reference except knowing that when I was young all my friend's parents were really into it, and they were all really boring. I'm sure that doesn't help....

I picked up O&O from my library last week, and I'm kinda so-so on it. I don't dislike it, but I'm not loving it, either. I get the feeling the more I listen to it the more I'll enjoy it. It reminds me of when I started listening to Big Star. And more recently, getting into later Kinks. It does sound dated, as does Pepper. I think most 60s stuff does, but not in a bad way. It just sounds like its time.

As for the OP, I'm a Beatles fan, and I love Pepper. Like many I prefer the Rubber Soul/Revolver era best, but I enjoy all of it. I even enjoyed Let It Be-Naked a couple of weeks ago, and was given tickets to a dinner theater Beatles thing. I enjoyed it way more than I thought I would. The guy playing Harrison was good enough that I would go see him perform more of his songs.

Speaking of Harrison, I seem to enjoy his stuff more and more as I get older, but I still think his Pepper song stinks.