or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › 50th anniversary of Beatles on Ed Sullivan celebrated with new Apple TV channel
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

50th anniversary of Beatles on Ed Sullivan celebrated with new Apple TV channel

post #1 of 43
Thread Starter 
Commemorating 50 years since legendary band The Beatles appeared on "The Ed Sullivan Show," the Apple TV was given a quiet update on Monday, featuring content from the band available on iTunes, along with the band's landmark U.S. television appearance in 1964.

Beatles


The new channel, simply named "The Beatles," is now available on users' Apple TV home screens. The widescreen icon is a screencap showing the "Fab Four" in their first appearance on Sullivan's program in 1964.

Beatles


It was 50 years ago Sunday, on Feb. 9, 1964, that 60 percent of American TVs tuned in to watch The Beatles make their U.S. television debut on "Sullivan." That event is considered a milestone in American culture, bringing about the "Beatlemania" craze that swept the nation.

The new Beatles channel on Apple TV features the band's historic debut performance on Sullivan's program, available to stream for free. The 14-minute performance from New York City is presented in its entirety for a limited time.

Beatles


The new channel also promotes the availability of all of The Beatles' U.S. albums, which are available for purchase on iTunes digitally for the first time. The same content, including the performance on "Ed Sullivan," is also available on Mac or PC via the iTunes Store.
post #2 of 43
Steve WOULD have done this.
post #3 of 43
We are so sick of the Beatles in the UK. Every single event they get the aged Sir Paul McCartney to sing one of the Beatles collection of nursery rhymes to the jubilant crowds. Please retire and save us all. Arghh. Hope my ATV doesn't auto upgrade.
post #4 of 43

Awesome!

post #5 of 43
good move Apple

they should add the special last night for sale - amazing - Ringo proved why he is a Beatle - OUTSTANDING!

Paul - on dvd for tonight!
post #6 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaba View Post

We are so sick of the Beatles in the UK. Every single event they get the aged Sir Paul McCartney to sing one of the Beatles collection of nursery rhymes to the jubilant crowds. Please retire and save us all. Arghh. Hope my ATV doesn't auto upgrade.

The UK has had phenomenal acts come out of that country. And the beetles are the best to ever come out. Not my cup of tea, but you HAVE to support them. I don't want them to stop, nor the stones. It's not like Paul is doing rock songs- he can keep it going.

Eventually they'll all be dead and millions will wish they could see them again.

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #7 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

The UK has had phenomenal acts come out of that country. And the beetles are the best to ever come out. Not my cup of tea, but you HAVE to support them. I don't want them to stop, nor the stones. It's not like Paul is doing rock songs- he can keep it going.

Eventually they'll all be dead and millions will wish they could see them again.

I don't HAVE to support them and I am speaking subjectively, and don't speak for the whole of the UK.
post #8 of 43
Then why say "We are so sick of the Beatles in the UK."? It sounded like you were claiming to speak for the whole country.

"Wankers talking about other wankers and wanking." XamaX

I'll never get back the time i just wasted reading that post." Miami Craig
" It's like you've achieved some kind of irrelevance zen, or...

Reply

"Wankers talking about other wankers and wanking." XamaX

I'll never get back the time i just wasted reading that post." Miami Craig
" It's like you've achieved some kind of irrelevance zen, or...

Reply
post #9 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaba View Post

We are so sick of the Beatles in the UK. Every single event they get the aged Sir Paul McCartney to sing one of the Beatles collection of nursery rhymes to the jubilant crowds. Please retire and save us all. Arghh. Hope my ATV doesn't auto upgrade.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zaba View Post


I don't HAVE to support them and I am speaking subjectively, and don't speak for the whole of the UK.

 

When you say ..."save us all"  it certainly sounds like you are speaking for the whole of the UK.

But, you also say the crowds are "jubilant."  Guess they indeed don't agree with you.

 

Except for a few glimmers, I for one, thought the show was sorely lacking until Paul and Ringo took the stage.


Edited by BuzDots - 2/10/14 at 7:20am
OMG here we go again...
Reply
OMG here we go again...
Reply
post #10 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielSW View Post

Well then go s_d yrself, w_nker.
When I have finished s_dding myself and w_nking I'll listen to some real musicians.
post #11 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaba View Post

When I have finished s_dding myself and w_nking I'll listen to some real musicians.

I would think a real Englishman could do both at the same time.
post #12 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

I would think a real Englishman could do both at the same time.
I'm only half English.
post #13 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex London View Post

Then why say "We are so sick of the Beatles in the UK."? It sounded like you were claiming to speak for the whole country.
I apologise for my earlier flippant post, which I did correct. I am speaking only for myself and I am sick of the Beatles and Paul McCartney. Surely I don't have to like them? There are far better musicians on this planet that I prefer to admire.
post #14 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaba View Post

I apologise for my earlier flippant post, which I did correct. I am speaking only for myself and I am sick of the Beatles and Paul McCartney. Surely I don't have to like them? There are far better musicians on this planet that I prefer to admire.

I see your point, and I feel the same way about some U.S. exports that are downright embarrassing. Big cars, SUVs, violent Hollywood movies.

Cross-Cultural Tolerance Differential (CCTD) example: when Brits come to the U.S., they frequently buy a big American car, preferably something like a pink Cadillac, something truly horrible to those of us who are so over big cars.

When Americans go to the UK, they do standout gaffes like buying a Barbour Thornproof.

But the Beatles, In their time, for their time, they were the first to do good ecumenical rock and roll, and some of their later writing stands on its own as great music. Can't be denied.

Ringo's still the wise survivor, John a terrible loss. Paul—too much exposure.
post #15 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaba View Post


I apologise for my earlier flippant post, which I did correct. I am speaking only for myself and I am sick of the Beatles and Paul McCartney. Surely I don't have to like them? There are far better musicians on this planet that I prefer to admire.

Its a shame your admiration is limited, so if a new musician arrived that you admired, you would then have to stop admiring one of your current ones?

Try to put the Beatles in the context of the time they arrived - they did much, wrote much and sang much that can be admired - not all of it certainly. If you never admired them - too bad for you - if you did and now don't what did they do (presumably after 50% of them died) that changed your view...

 

all you need is love, love is all you need

post #16 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaba View Post

I apologise for my earlier flippant post, which I did correct. I am speaking only for myself and I am sick of the Beatles and Paul McCartney. Surely I don't have to like them? There are far better musicians on this planet that I prefer to admire.

I think you're remiss for not admiring them, which is no the same as liking them or their music.The Beatles are undoubtedly an important part of music and musicians you do admire (assuming you don't only listen to Big Bang, Jazz, or Classic from the 1950s or earlier). It's like not understanding what Charlie Chaplin did for the movie industry even though his films are woefully inferior and simplistic compared to what is possible today. If you admire that came after The Beatles it's likely they were inspired by them.



"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #17 of 43

Real musicians? Like Justin Bieber? 

post #18 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

Ringo's still the wise survivor, John a terrible loss. Paul—too much exposure.

I think George should be included in the terrible loss category as well. Have a re-listen to the "All Things Must Pass" album when you get a chance

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Right_said_fred View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaba View Post


I apologise for my earlier flippant post, which I did correct. I am speaking only for myself and I am sick of the Beatles and Paul McCartney. Surely I don't have to like them? There are far better musicians on this planet that I prefer to admire.

Its a shame your admiration is limited, so if a new musician arrived that you admired, you would then have to stop admiring one of your current ones?

Try to put the Beatles in the context of the time they arrived - they did much, wrote much and sang much that can be admired - not all of it certainly. If you never admired them - too bad for you - if you did and now don't what did they do (presumably after 50% of them died) that changed your view...

 

all you need is love, love is all you need

I think I understand how zaba feels although I agree his first remark came across rather flippant.  A lot of the Beatles music that I admired when it was released, sounds really superficial to me today, some just awful. A few songs have stood the test of time but I certainly wouldn't want to listen to them on a daily basis. Some bring back good memories, but I don't have much desire to relive my youth or reminisce on the past. There is a lot of great new music but it is hard to find. For those who are looking for a good internet radio station I always recommend Radio Paradise. They have a really good mix of old, new and eclectic music... and no ads.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #19 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by pikester View Post

Real musicians? Like Justin Bieber? 
Not exactly, real musicians like these...
http://youtu.be/nls1HtXQe8E
post #20 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaba View Post

Not exactly, real musicians like these...
http://youtu.be/nls1HtXQe8E

Real musicians are defined by those doing covers of Britney Spears songs? You don't think anyone else in the Beatles could do a cover for Britney Spears song?

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #21 of 43
Massive influence perhaps, but not a great or particularly innovative band, just popular, with a handful of decent songs, a lot of middling ones, and some singalong tunes for children.

Give me The Kinks or The Stones any day. The Village Green Preservation Channel would be a good one.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #22 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

I think George should be included in the terrible loss category as well. Have a re-listen to the "All Things Must Pass" album when you get a chance.


You're right. "Turn off your mind, relax, and float downstream" are words to live by. I haven't listened to that album, sorry to say, but must.
post #23 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Real musicians are defined by those doing covers of Britney Spears songs? You don't think anyone else in the Beatles could do a cover for Britney Spears song?
Ha ha, you obviously don't get it. These are first rate musicians, McCartney wouldn't even understand what they were doing musically. The song 'hit me' is there own, the others are covers but incredibly sophisticated, something you would not understand judging by your comment. You can not dispute that these are excellent musicians, you can dislike it of course.
post #24 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaba View Post

Ha ha, you obviously don't get it. These are first rate musicians, McCartney wouldn't even understand what they were doing musically. The song 'hit me' is there own, the others are covers but incredibly sophisticated, something you would not understand judging by your comment. You can not dispute that these are excellent musicians, you can dislike it of course.

Your definition is clearly subjective and extremely narrow which is probably why you have this elitist stance. You fail to see how music you don't like is possibly admired, revered, inspirational or worthwhile to others.

It's quite sad, really, despite it's commonality. I'm certainly you also take the common stance of scoffing at anyone who doesn't know of a new talent you have "discovered" but then get pissy when they become popular which you feel cheapens the experience you had been pimping out to prove to others that you know better music than they do.

You aren't unique in this but that doesn't make it any less an atrocity to the art form.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #25 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Your definition is clearly subjective and extremely narrow which is probably why you have this elitist stance. You fail to see how music you don't like is possibly admired, revered, inspirational or worthwhile to others.

It's quite sad, really, despite it's commonality. I'm certainly you also take the common stance of scoffing at anyone who doesn't know of a new talent you have "discovered" but then get pissy when they become popular which you feel cheapens the experience you had been pimping out to prove to others that you know better music than they do.

You aren't unique in this but that doesn't make it any less an atrocity to the art form.
Actually I am talking about musicians and musicianship, I couldn't give a stuff about your comments. What's wrong with being different, and actually liking music created by musicians. Rather than the alternative. No need to be a pompous tw-t.
post #26 of 43
Wait, The Beatles weren't real musicians and/or didn't create real music?

I'm not a fan, but I don't see what your angle is there.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #27 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

Wait, The Beatles weren't real musicians and/or didn't create real music?

I'm not a fan, but I don't see what your angle is there.
My point is ... How can I put it ... A famous English author Barbara Cartland, another Shakespeare, both writers, there is a huge chasm between them. I listen to the best. That's it.
post #28 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaba View Post
 
 I listen to the best. That's it.

You seriously think that link you posted qualifies in the 'Best' music category?

Seriously?

 

I would classify it as mediocre amateur pop. I've heard more inspiring music played by an unemployed person on a city sidewalk.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #29 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaba View Post


Ha ha, you obviously don't get it. These are first rate musicians, McCartney wouldn't even understand what they were doing musically. The song 'hit me' is there own, the others are covers but incredibly sophisticated, something you would not understand judging by your comment. You can not dispute that these are excellent musicians, you can dislike it of course.

 

Hahahahahaha

 

Oh boy... another musical genius.

 

:rolleyes:
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #30 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaba View Post


 I listen to the best. That's it.

 

If you're not talking about Pink Floyd, then you don't listen to the best! And even they were huge fans of The Beatles!

 

I've heard some Beatles but not all. I'm looking forward to streaming this gig tonight!

post #31 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post
 

I've heard more inspiring music played by an unemployed person on a city sidewalk.

 

Some of the people busking in the London Underground are really very talented.

post #32 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

You seriously think that link you posted qualifies in the 'Best' music category?
Seriously?

I would classify it as mediocre amateur pop. I've heard more inspiring music played by an unemployed person on a city sidewalk.

Another fool. I'm talking about musicians not wether you like it or not. These are professional and talented musicians. I can't argue with anybody about musical taste, you like what you like. I prefer music to be done by musicians, the Beatles weren't great musicians. I prefer buildings to be designed by architects, I prefer my food cooked by a professional chef. I don't think I can put it any simpler for you idiots. On the last note if a professional chef cooked a superb meal full of interesting flavours and combinations of spices and you didn't like it, you could not argue that he was a shit chef, simply that you did not like what he produces. Now you may prefer the food cooked by the amateurs. Go for it!
Also I find the assumption that if you are unemployed you are somehow automatically deemed talentless. Just shows what an idiot you are.
Edited by zaba - 2/10/14 at 11:43pm
post #33 of 43
I like the assumption that the artists you listen to are real and talented, and everyone else is somehow fake and amateur. People might tolerate your opinion if you were a bit less smarmy about it.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #34 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

I like the assumption that the artists you listen to are real and talented, and everyone else is somehow fake and amateur. People might tolerate your opinion if you were a bit less smarmy about it.
It seems like everyone in here is making an assumption about what I think, I gave an example of talented musicians, that's it. I don't class the Beatles in the same league. I don't give a toss if you agree or disagree or think I am attacking your own personal musical taste as being somehow inferior. THAT IS NOT THE POINT. Great things are created by the people who have mastered there art.
post #35 of 43
You could have just said you don't care for The Beatles prefer other artists, no one would have any issue with that. Once you started talking about musicianship and talent (as if either are absolutely quantifiable) you lost it. The Beatles were talented musicians, even if not in ways that you (or I) care about or appreciate.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #36 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

You could have just said you don't care for The Beatles prefer other artists, no one would have any issue with that. Once you started talking about musicianship and talent (as if either are absolutely quantifiable) you lost it. The Beatles were talented musicians, even if not in ways that you (or I) care about or appreciate.
Thanks. I know, got carried away, a bit of a pointless exercise on my part. You live and learn. At least there are a few rational people on here to provide the balance. :-)
post #37 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaba View Post

You live and learn. At least there are a few rational people on here to provide the balance. :-)

There are plenty of rational people here but you aren't one of them. In fact, you spent the day attacking them for pointing out that you were not being rational. Do I need to point out all your comments where you state how you prefer music created by actual musicians, not the music created by talentless non-musiciians (whatever that means)? I certainly hope you have learned but from my experience people that choose to be elitist and closed minded tend to remain that way.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #38 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaba View Post

I stand by the first part but I never actually said the second part. GFY.

When you write that you prefer music by actual musicians your implication is clear. You don't think The Beatles (or anything else by musicians you don't like) are real musicians who don't produce real music.

As I stated, people like you typically don't learn and with every new comment you reinforce your initial elitist stance on art.


Elitist and pompous comments by Zaba:
Quote:
...Beatles collection of nursery rhymes…

…When I have finished s_dding myself and w_nking I'll listen to some real musicians.…

…real musicians like these…

…[personal attack omitted]...

…These are first rate musicians, McCartney wouldn't even understand what they were doing musically…

…[personal attack omitted]...

…What's wrong with […] actually liking music created by musicians…

…[personal attack omitted]…

…I listen to the best. That's it…

…[personal attack omitted]…

…I prefer music to be done by musicians, the Beatles weren't great musicians. I prefer buildings to be designed by architects, I prefer my food cooked by a professional chef. I don't think I can put it any simpler for you idiots…

...I am attacking your own personal musical taste as being somehow inferior… This one I took out of context for fun.

…[personal attack omitted]…

…[personal attack omitted]…

Edited by SolipsismX - 2/11/14 at 8:00am

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #39 of 43
Originally Posted by zaba View Post
I listen to the best. That's it.

 

Grow up, buckaroonie. No, you don’t.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #40 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaba View Post


GFY.

 

GUYA

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › 50th anniversary of Beatles on Ed Sullivan celebrated with new Apple TV channel