One of the likable aspects of most Pitchfork lists is that their writers and reviewers tend not to be of the Rolling Stone Magazine reviewer vintage. This makes their 60's list particular interesting. What do the music snobs that are not of the 60s themselves think about the 60s? The top 20 can be found here with Pitchfork's commentary on each choice.
The list, without their commentary is:
20. The Shangri-Las: "Out in the Streets" (1965)
19. The Beatles: "Tomorrow Never Knows" (1966)
18. The Crystals: "Then He Kissed Me" (1963)
17. Creedence Clearwater Revival: "Fortunate Son" (1969)
16. The Stooges: "I Wanna Be Your Dog" (1969)
15. Aretha Franklin: "Think" (1968)
14. The Beach Boys: "Don't Worry Baby" (1964)
13. The Band: "The Weight" (1968)
12. The Rolling Stones: "Gimme Shelter" (1969)
11. Led Zeppelin: "Dazed and Confused" (1969)
10. Desmond Dekker & The Aces: "Israelites" (1969)
9. The Who: "I Can't Explain" (1965)
8. Johnny Cash: "Folsom Prison Blues (Live at Folsom Prison)" (1968)
7. The Beach Boys: "Wouldn't It Be Nice" (1966)
6. The Ronettes: "Be My Baby" (1963)
5. The Beatles: "A Day in the Life" (1967)
4. Bob Dylan: "Like a Rolling Stone" (1965)
3. Sam Cooke: "A Change Is Gonna Come" (1964)
2. The Jackson 5: "I Want You Back" (1969)
1. The Beach Boys: "God Only Knows" (1966)
For those keeping score, that's 3 Beach Boys songs compared to 2 for the Beatles, 1 for the Stones, 1 for the Who, and none for The Kinks. The influences of the Beach Boys on indie pop (as opposed to indie rock) are great, and I love indie pop, but I think the Beach Boys have become hugely overrated. I really don't know what I'm going to do about them when I make my own 60s list. I'm sure I'll be setting myself up for ridicule including Surfin' USA and California Girls instead of the critics favorites, but I don't like the critics favorites very much. It's not that I don't respect them. I just don't want to listen to them when I turn on my stereo, and that's a very important criterion for me.
Perhaps this speaks to the youthful reviewers at Pitchfork, but the list has 6 songs from 1969. That means that one year at the end of the decade accounts for nearly one third of the list, while 1960, 1961, and 1962 are totally unrepresented. Pitchfork isn't alone in leaving out 1962, but I have to say I'm surprised to see only one song from 1967. I'm not sure how I feel about including Folsom Prison Blues. While the live track from 1968 was, in fact, the one that charted, the Sun single is from 1955.
The list has three girl groups, including two Phil Spector songs. I'm sure Brian Wilson would approve. The one Stones song is not the choice I would make, but I've been criticized for that myself. I also have a lot of trouble with "Tomorrow Never Knows" as the second best Beatles song. The recording was groundbreaking, and I suppose that's also the appeal of the Spector and Beach Boys choices. It's just that the songs themselves aren't ones I want to hear over and over again. Maybe the Pitchfork reviewers have more of a historical influence appreciation of the 60s as opposed to a real listener's perspective.
Parts of the overall list defy explanation. "I Want to Hold Your Hand" is way down at #58 behind Tommy James and the Shondells' "Crimson and Clover" and The Monkees "Daydream Believer". I like the Monkees, but they don't get to go ahead of early Beatles. Don't try to tell me they even would have been formulated if there was no Meet the Beatles.
Showing posts with label Top songs of the 60s. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Top songs of the 60s. Show all posts
Sunday, May 20, 2012
Sunday, August 7, 2011
Top Ten Beatles Songs
One of the many challenges I expect to face when I eventually get around to making a top 500 of the 60s is ranking Beatles songs. It was challenging enough just having to size up the one new Beatles recording from the 70s against the rest of that decade. I ended up placing Let It Be at number 5 for the decade in my best-of-the-70s list behind four punk era songs, but if I had had more than one Beatles album to choose from, it's tough to guess how they would have fared in head to head competition with the best that early punk had to offer.
As reported by CNN, Rolling Stone magazine took on the task last year of ranking the top 100 Beatles songs, and the CNN report lists the top 10. Two George Harrison songs make the top 10, which I think is at least one too many. I'm reasonably satisfied with "A Day in the Life" and "I Want to Hold Your Hand" at #1 and #2. Apart from "Come Together" at #9, the rest of the list is overweighted with their quieter songs. It seems bizarre to say, but I think the Beatles are really underappreciated as a rock band. McCartney's ability to write phenomenal pop songs and Lennon's ability to think globally and act (write) introspectively, particularly in their later years, leads to lists like this one that are heavy on what I think of as Blue Album material and light on Red Album material.
The blue and red albums, a pair of double albums released by Capitol in 1973, were actually called "1962-1966" and "1967-1970" respectively. When I was a kid, I owned the Blue Album and my best friend owned the Red Album, and I think I thought of myself as more of a Blue Album kind of guy up until at least the early 90s. The early Beatles made a big resurgence in my personal music rankings in the mid to late 90s. The CD set "Live at the BBC" and the movie Backbeat, both released in 1994, were major tipping points. Joining a band around the same time also gave me a new appreciation of the effort required to be a good unit, as opposed to merely being a collection of creative individuals. The early Beatles were the former and the later Beatles were the latter.
It's interesting that Rolling Stone notes that "A Day In the Life" was among the finest collaborations between Lennon and McCartney, while ranking it #1, yet little else on the list reflect their true collaborations because of the dominance of the later material. The collaborations also get fewer spots because of the decision to give George Harrison two slots. For those interested in who actually wrote what in the later years of The Beatles, Walter Everett's book The Beatles as Musicians is a nice reference. The Beatles of the Blue Album were undoubtedly more sophisticated, and in many ways a lot more interesting, but at the end of the day when ranking songs, I think the Red Album Beatles got short shrift.
Early Beatles songs are currently coming out slightly better at Vinyl Surrender, but I Want to Hold Your Hand in inexplicably absent from the top 10 for the moment. Sometime within the next year or so I'll make my best-of-the-sixties list, and we'll find out if I'm a hypocrite or not.
As reported by CNN, Rolling Stone magazine took on the task last year of ranking the top 100 Beatles songs, and the CNN report lists the top 10. Two George Harrison songs make the top 10, which I think is at least one too many. I'm reasonably satisfied with "A Day in the Life" and "I Want to Hold Your Hand" at #1 and #2. Apart from "Come Together" at #9, the rest of the list is overweighted with their quieter songs. It seems bizarre to say, but I think the Beatles are really underappreciated as a rock band. McCartney's ability to write phenomenal pop songs and Lennon's ability to think globally and act (write) introspectively, particularly in their later years, leads to lists like this one that are heavy on what I think of as Blue Album material and light on Red Album material.
The blue and red albums, a pair of double albums released by Capitol in 1973, were actually called "1962-1966" and "1967-1970" respectively. When I was a kid, I owned the Blue Album and my best friend owned the Red Album, and I think I thought of myself as more of a Blue Album kind of guy up until at least the early 90s. The early Beatles made a big resurgence in my personal music rankings in the mid to late 90s. The CD set "Live at the BBC" and the movie Backbeat, both released in 1994, were major tipping points. Joining a band around the same time also gave me a new appreciation of the effort required to be a good unit, as opposed to merely being a collection of creative individuals. The early Beatles were the former and the later Beatles were the latter.
It's interesting that Rolling Stone notes that "A Day In the Life" was among the finest collaborations between Lennon and McCartney, while ranking it #1, yet little else on the list reflect their true collaborations because of the dominance of the later material. The collaborations also get fewer spots because of the decision to give George Harrison two slots. For those interested in who actually wrote what in the later years of The Beatles, Walter Everett's book The Beatles as Musicians is a nice reference. The Beatles of the Blue Album were undoubtedly more sophisticated, and in many ways a lot more interesting, but at the end of the day when ranking songs, I think the Red Album Beatles got short shrift.
Early Beatles songs are currently coming out slightly better at Vinyl Surrender, but I Want to Hold Your Hand in inexplicably absent from the top 10 for the moment. Sometime within the next year or so I'll make my best-of-the-sixties list, and we'll find out if I'm a hypocrite or not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)