McCartney on iTunes: "We want it to happen"

Too funny. Thanks for the laugh.

If you think that Beatles are just beatlemania you'd been lost half of the history!

That is really strange, as they were the first big record company to say they would go DRM free. Apple's pretty much given them what they wanted, both when they thought they needed DRM and when they decided they didn't need DRM, and now they'll get to charge a larger margin for a track if they want to.

I really don't get this. It seems like a win-win, as EMI has little to no overhead for this and the people who are casual fans will download the big hits to round out their playlists. Apple gets a cut, and it's a spiritual success, too, since Jobs has pretty much been dropping some bit of Beatles fandom in nearly every keynote I've seen. I think I actually remembering him once demonstrating music playback on an iPhone or iPod touch and saying, "I love this song." He could easily have played something semi-obscure from iTunes to boost sales from the kind of Apple fan who watches the keynote (guilty), but he choose the Beatles.

I personally like a few of their songs and probably will get around to ripping one of the compilation albums at my mom's house, but I'd be just as happy to pay $.99-1.50 for just the songs I'm most interested in, and that would actually make the above companies some cash.

Oh, lord.... wikipedia is now considered fact. It's officially the end of the world as we know it. I'm going to start writing my own dictionary now.

Oh come on. Comparing the Beatles to Mozart is ridiculous. Mozart achieved more in one phrase than the Beatles could in their collective musical lifetimes. He also had a dry sense of humour still evident in his music today.

Their lifestyles may all have been unwholesome, but that's a result, not a generator, of fame. At least McCartney in his dotage has the sense to promote a healthy and environmentally sound lifestyle.

As for music, 'The Beatles" is no longer relevant. It speaks of yesterday's problems, not today's. It doesn't speak to today's people, because this is a very different world to that of the faux-innocence of the 60s. They were a product of their time, and so was their music.

Now while Mozart's music was a product of the *eighteenth* century (take note), it is still relevant today, because it speaks of how to rise above problems; not simply documenting them.

Of all the Beatles, Harrison was the only one with any kind of musicianship; and he still was not particularly accomplished.

This doesn't mean I don't enjoy their music -- I just enjoy it on a different level to genius like Mozart.

"Mozart achieved more in one phrase than the Beatles could in their collective musical lifetimes."

As a lifelong musician, I completely disagree with this statement, and I happen to love Mozart. You want to talk relevancy? Certainly, on a purely musical level, more people in modern times can relate to the Beatles' music than Mozart's. The Beatles were also brilliant lyricists and singers, something Mozart cannot attest to (or at least, if he were, history does not mention it). There is a reason that their music has stood the test of time, and so many musicians cite them as influential.

"Of all the Beatles, Harrison was the only one with any kind of musicianship; and he still was not particularly accomplished."

Possibly one of the most ridiculous statements I've ever heard. Paul McCartney is a master of multiple instruments, and could play circles around George on the guitar (who was talented in his own right). John, Paul, and George were all accomplished vocalists whose recorded harmonies are noted as some of the tightest ever. And I think that maybe, just maybe, they had some talent as composers, or does that not count as musicianship?

Next time, try to think about what you're saying before you type it...

You must not be into much in terms of modern music since 99% of it is "drug-fuelled dross."

And 99% of it is influenced by the Beatles.