On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 15:28:34 GMT, d wrote:

On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 14:53:14 +0000
e27002 aurora wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jan 2016 14:29:10 +0000, Robert
wrote:
Why? Good music is good music, whatever the genre.

Let's see what passes the test of time. I concede the Beatles show
signs of doing just that.

The Beatles were just the first boy band with all the accompanying hysteria.
Once all the baby boomers have shuffled off this mortal coil they'll just
just another name in the musical history books. I doubt many people under the
age of 60 actually listens to them on a regular basis.

You may be right. Although their music has been re-arranged and used
for countless purposes.

My issue with those people is how many of their followers became drug
users and died, or were permanently damaged. I have known two former
LSD users, who were from good backgrounds, but are mentally damaged
and will never lead normal lives.

Now, they were responsible for their own actions. Let's just say
their chosen role models were sadly lacking.

On Sat, 02 Jan 2016 10:04:06 +0000
e27002 aurora wrote:
My issue with those people is how many of their followers became drug
users and died, or were permanently damaged. I have known two former
LSD users, who were from good backgrounds, but are mentally damaged
and will never lead normal lives.

Certain personality types are attracted to addictive or mind altering
substances or behaviours whether its drug taking, gambling or heavy drinking.
Its always been so and always will be so short of some mass eugenics program
to weed the guilty genes out of the population.

Now, they were responsible for their own actions. Let's just say
their chosen role models were sadly lacking.

Indeed they are responsible. If they want to do it thats up to them but I
personally don't see why my taxes should go to pick up the pieces of their
lives or health when it goes pear shaped.

--
Spud

On Sat, 02 Jan 2016 12:53:31 GMT, d wrote:

On Sat, 02 Jan 2016 10:04:06 +0000
e27002 aurora wrote:
My issue with those people is how many of their followers became drug
users and died, or were permanently damaged. I have known two former
LSD users, who were from good backgrounds, but are mentally damaged
and will never lead normal lives.

Certain personality types are attracted to addictive or mind altering
substances or behaviours whether its drug taking, gambling or heavy drinking.
Its always been so and always will be so short of some mass eugenics program
to weed the guilty genes out of the population.

Now, they were responsible for their own actions. Let's just say
their chosen role models were sadly lacking.

Indeed they are responsible. If they want to do it thats up to them but I
personally don't see why my taxes should go to pick up the pieces of their
lives or health when it goes pear shaped.

Precisely. As always the taxpayer who uses his head is punished,
while the careless are rewarded.

This not the only circumstance under which HNG uses taxpayer's
hard-earned funds to remediate against others unsafe practices and
behaviors.

There is not a lot one can do about it.

Spud wrote

Indeed they are responsible. If they want to do it thats up to them but I
personally don't see why my taxes should go to pick up the pieces of their
lives or health when it goes pear shaped.

Happens all the time, think Mountain Rescue or the guy who drowned trying to
rescue his dog (usually the dog makes it) or any A&E admission. About the
only trace of the old system is the charge to Insurance companies when a
motorist is treated after an accident.

--
Mike D

In article ,
(e27002 aurora) wrote:

On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 15:28:34 GMT, d wrote:

The Beatles were just the first boy band with all the accompanying
hysteria. Once all the baby boomers have shuffled off this mortal coil
they'll justjust another name in the musical history books. I doubt many
people under the age of 60 actually listens to them on a regular basis.

[There's something odd about your newsreader. I got none of the above text
in this post, just the headers which is why I'm commenting to Aurora's
comment because his browser did pick up your content. I can't see the
content of your reply to this message of his either.]

You're totally wrong about the Beatles if my family is anything to go by. My
daughters (29 and 23) are and always have been as keen on Beatles music as I
am and now my granddaughter (9) is too.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Sat, 02 Jan 2016 10:25:21 -0600
wrote:
In article ,
(e27002 aurora) wrote:

On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 15:28:34 GMT, d wrote:

The Beatles were just the first boy band with all the accompanying
hysteria. Once all the baby boomers have shuffled off this mortal coil
they'll justjust another name in the musical history books. I doubt many
people under the age of 60 actually listens to them on a regular basis.

[There's something odd about your newsreader. I got none of the above text
in this post, just the headers which is why I'm commenting to Aurora's
comment because his browser did pick up your content. I can't see the
content of your reply to this message of his either.]

Probably a problem with the aioe nttp server which went off air over the new
year. Another of my posts seems to have completely vanished into the ether.

You're totally wrong about the Beatles if my family is anything to go by. My
daughters (29 and 23) are and always have been as keen on Beatles music as I
am and now my granddaughter (9) is too.

There are always exceptions. But in general the people who listen to the
pop music (this doesn't apply to classical or rock) of a certain era are
people who grew up in that era so the majority of people who listen to 60s
pop music would have had their formative years in that decade.

--
Spud

On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 10:31:53 GMT, d wrote:

On Sat, 02 Jan 2016 10:25:21 -0600
wrote:
In article ,
(e27002 aurora) wrote:

On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 15:28:34 GMT, d wrote:

The Beatles were just the first boy band with all the accompanying
hysteria. Once all the baby boomers have shuffled off this mortal coil
they'll justjust another name in the musical history books. I doubt many
people under the age of 60 actually listens to them on a regular basis.

[There's something odd about your newsreader. I got none of the above text
in this post, just the headers which is why I'm commenting to Aurora's
comment because his browser did pick up your content. I can't see the
content of your reply to this message of his either.]

Probably a problem with the aioe nttp server which went off air over the new
year. Another of my posts seems to have completely vanished into the ether.

You're totally wrong about the Beatles if my family is anything to go by. My
daughters (29 and 23) are and always have been as keen on Beatles music as I
am and now my granddaughter (9) is too.

There are always exceptions. But in general the people who listen to the
pop music (this doesn't apply to classical or rock) of a certain era are
people who grew up in that era so the majority of people who listen to 60s
pop music would have had their formative years in that decade.

The word "pop" as in popular implies lowest common denominator. If
you ever watch footage of the 1960s TOP performances, for the most
part these are not talented people.

That is not to say I do not have collection of modern CDs. My tastes
vary from Steely Dan, Gene Page, thru John Mayall and Miles Davis.

And, yes I am aware the trendy thing is to keep all ones music on a
hard drive. But, I like having the CDs.

On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 10:48:35 +0000
e27002 aurora wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 10:31:53 GMT, d wrote:
There are always exceptions. But in general the people who listen to the
pop music (this doesn't apply to classical or rock) of a certain era are
people who grew up in that era so the majority of people who listen to 60s
pop music would have had their formative years in that decade.

The word "pop" as in popular implies lowest common denominator. If
you ever watch footage of the 1960s TOP performances, for the most
part these are not talented people.

TBH I don't consider the Beatles particularly talented. To me it just sounds
like a lot of whiny nasal vocals and guitar twanging. But then that sums up
60s pop music in general for this 80s kid.

And, yes I am aware the trendy thing is to keep all ones music on a
hard drive. But, I like having the CDs.

I still have most of my CDs but these days I just stream off youtube. I have
no idea why people pay for streaming services when its all free.

--
Spud

On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 11:00:33 GMT, d wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 10:48:35 +0000
e27002 aurora wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 10:31:53 GMT, d wrote:
There are always exceptions. But in general the people who listen to the
pop music (this doesn't apply to classical or rock) of a certain era are
people who grew up in that era so the majority of people who listen to 60s
pop music would have had their formative years in that decade.

The word "pop" as in popular implies lowest common denominator. If
you ever watch footage of the 1960s TOP performances, for the most
part these are not talented people.

TBH I don't consider the Beatles particularly talented. To me it just sounds
like a lot of whiny nasal vocals and guitar twanging. But then that sums up
60s pop music in general for this 80s kid.

If you have ever seen black and white footage of a performance from
the "She Loves You" days, Ringo displays and a complete lack of
talent.

He did improve. How could he do otherwise?


And, yes I am aware the trendy thing is to keep all ones music on a
hard drive. But, I like having the CDs.

I still have most of my CDs but these days I just stream off youtube. I have
no idea why people pay for streaming services when its all free.

On 03/01/2016 10:48, e27002 aurora wrote:
[...]
And, yes I am aware the trendy thing is to keep all ones music on a
hard drive. But, I like having the CDs.


You're a bit out of date... music is streamed from the cloud these days!

Lots of the younger folk listen to all sorts of stuff from all eras, as
it's so easily available.