Music Why are ABBA so popular?

  • Thread starter Thread starter pinball1970
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Music
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the enduring quality of music, particularly focusing on the Beatles' songwriting prowess. Participants emphasize that while many can write tunes, creating consistently great music that resonates over decades is rare. They argue that strong musical composition is paramount, with effective delivery enhancing but not defining a song's greatness. Comparisons are drawn between the Beatles and ABBA, noting that the Beatles' individual talents contributed significantly to their lasting success. Overall, the conversation highlights the complex interplay of composition, performance, and cultural impact in music.
  • #51
I have never ever heard anyone refer to The Beatles as singular.

"The Beatles is the best"? No way.

They might say "Wham! is the best."
 
  • Haha
Likes pinball1970
Science news on Phys.org
  • #52
PeroK said:
Oliver's army is here to stay.
Oliver's army are on their way.
Clever trick he used there.

John Lennon used awful English on "How do you sleep." Probably to make it more edgy for his attack on McCartney.

"The only thing you done was yesterday."
 
  • #53
This is brilliant and bonkers.



 
  • #54
pinball1970 said:
This is brilliant and bonkers.




I'm a sucker for the xylophone.

Here's a cover.

 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970
  • #55
PeroK said:
Oliver's army is here to stay.
Oliver's army are on their way.
Not sure what your point is. If you think "Oliver's army are on their way" you would be wrong. It should be "Oliver's army is on the way"

It would be correct to say "The men in Oliver's army are on their way"
 
  • #56
phinds said:
Not sure what your point is. If you think "Oliver's army are on their way" you would be wrong. It should be "Oliver's army is on the way"

It would be correct to say "The men in Oliver's army are on their way"
English is flexible, at least in common usage, in terms of a team or group being seen as a singular or plural noun, depending on the context. This is exemplified in those Elvis Costello lyrics. The second line implies the men in the army without stating this explicitly. I'm not sure of the status of this in terms of formal grammar, but it's stretching a point to say it's wrong. An English dictionary will often say something like "careful speakers will say such and such".

Similarly, it would be stretching a point to say that "Led Zeppelin are playing Madison Square Garden" is wrong. Or, "Real Madrid are the champions of Europe". The last one is particularly problematic if you insist that Real Madrid is a singular noun. "Real Madrid is the champion team of Europe" sounds clumsy and overly formal to me.
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970
  • #57
PeroK said:
Similarly, it would be stretching a point to say that "Led Zeppelin are playing Madison Square Garden" is wrong.
Gotta disagree.

Led Zeppelin is a single thing, not plural.

You might as well say "Madison Square Garden are sold out tonight."
 
  • #58
  • #59
PeroK said:
English is flexible, at least in common usage
On that we agree completely. I'm a bit more of a stickler than most people (OK, a LOT more) but I DO recognize that English is flexible and changing.

For example, when I was a kid saying something like "Thankfully, they were all OK" could only be interpreted grammatically as meaning that (1) they were all OK and (2) I am thankful for some unspecified thing. Also, "The desk will, hopefully, arrive before the weekend, could only be grammatically correct if you meant that the desk WILL arrive before the weekend and when it gets here it will be hopeful (about what is not specified).

Incorrect usage was SO prevalent that, as usually happens, "correct" bowed to actual usage, which is what a living language should do.

We disagree on singular/plural usage but it's one of those things where what I think of as correct may well change over time (and is, I guess, in the process of doing that now).
 
  • #60
PeroK said:
Madison Square Garden is not a collective noun.
Neither is Led Zeppelin, or ABBA.

Both are not just four peeps in a vacuum. A band is more than just its performers or occupants, just like MSG. They have a structure, they are surrounded by support people, and they are useless without their volumes of equipment.
 
Last edited:
  • #61
DaveC426913 said:
How not? I mean, any more or less than Led Zeppelin?

Both refer to the people in them, as well as the structure, people and equipment that surrounds and supports them.
You guys .....

Remember ABBA? Some decent tunes from them.
This one is pure beauty, I could gush about the pre chorus or the lovely middle eight or harmony but I'll leave it at, beautiful. I used to go and visit my gf in York and they had this on the Juke box. It went on every time, all the girls would look at me and say, "ABBA!?" Damn right.


 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Likes DennisN and DaveC426913
  • #63
PeroK said:
That's precisely what they are.

https://www.scribbr.co.uk/nouns/collective-noun/
I know what a collective noun is. That does not make the bands collective nouns.

As for their example: 'The Beatles broke up when Paul McCartney quit the band.' (which is a collective noun):

The name is explicitly indicating that
- The Beatles contains a definite article - a title as it were, indicating the performers themselves (that's their gimmick), and that
- The Beatles is plural - each performer being 'a Beatle'. Any one of them can say 'I am a Beatle_' (singular).

Contrarily, they are not called The ABBAs or The Led Zeppelins. And a single band member is not called 'an ABBA' or 'a Led Zeppelin'.

We don't say
- 'There are only three of The ABBAs left, after one ABBA passed away.'
- 'There are only three of The Led Zeppelins left, after one Led Zeppelin passed away.'

Apples and oranges.
 
Last edited:
  • Skeptical
  • Wow
Likes PeroK and pinball1970
  • #64
The Tiger, listening to them with older ears again I have noticed the are absolute kings of middle eight and pre chorus.

"Yellow eyes are glowing....." Part.



 
  • #65
Interestingly, my daughter happened to come in and saw the title of this thread. She was horrified. DAD ! She exclaimed loudly ... I can't BELIEVE you would use terrible grammar.

Ha. I taught her well :smile:
 
  • Haha
  • Skeptical
Likes DennisN, docnet and DaveC426913
  • #66
DaveC426913 said:
I know what a collective noun is. That does not make the bands collective nouns.
There is no obligation on the rest of the English-speaking world to obey what one Canadian thinks is the only way to use the language. In British English, the name of a team or band can be used with the singular or plural verb. That's a fact.

You can say we are wrong and we should all speak like Canadians - but we are under no obligation to follow your edict.
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970 and docnet
  • #67
I have been reading all the comments and trying out different contexts since yesterday.
(Since 41% of thread is now about that rather than music)
None of the singular applications sounds right.

A few examples.

I refer to Manchester United as "we," a lot. "Who are we playing tonight?" "Did we win?" "Yes, we beat Fulham."

Why we? I am a supporter.

Otherwise it is "they," "I hope they do better than last season."

It is one club, singular so I could use it but is sounds totally wrong, is this just my vernacular clicking in?
I really don't know.

Same with a band of two or more, "For me Deep Purple live 1972, no one could touch them or ever will."
 
  • #68
pinball1970 said:
I refer to Manchester United as "we," a lot. "Who are we playing tonight?" "Did we win?" "Yes, we beat Fulham."

Why we? I am a supporter.
This is where semantics overlaps with grammar. Manchester United is technically a singular noun. In one context it is a single entity. I would definitely say:

Manchester United FC was founded in 1878.

But, semantically, it represents a collection of players (in one context) and a collection of players, staff and supporters (in a wider context). In these contexts, it becomes increasingly contrived to avoid the plural form. For example:

The players who are representing MUFC are playing well tonight!

In this case, it is acceptable in British English to say more simply:

Manchester United are playing well tonight.

This emphasises the semantic point that it is a team of individuals that are all playing well. We can contrast this with:

Manchester United is playing well tonight.

Although this is grammatically correct, it sounds stilted.

PS in North America, this situation is generally avoided by pluralising the team names: NY Giants, Toronto Blue Jays etc.
 
  • Informative
Likes pinball1970
  • #69
DaveC426913 said:
I know what a collective noun is. That does not make the bands collective nouns.

As for their example: 'The Beatles broke up when Paul McCartney quit the band.' (which is a collective noun):

The name is explicitly indicating that
- The Beatles contains a definite article - a title as it were, indicating the performers themselves (that's their gimmick), and that
- The Beatles is plural - each performer being 'a Beatle'. Any one of them can say 'I am a Beatle_' (singular).

Contrarily, they are not called The ABBAs or The Led Zeppelins. And a single band member is not called 'an ABBA' or 'a Led Zeppelin'.

We don't say
- 'There are only three of The ABBAs left, after one ABBA passed away.'
- 'There are only three of The Led Zeppelins left, after one Led Zeppelin passed away.'

Apples and oranges.
"The Beatles" is the name of the band.

ABBA, Deep Purple, Led Zeppelin do not have a definite article in the name.

Oranges and apples.
 
  • #70
PeroK said:
In British English, the name of a team or band can be used with the singular or plural verb. That's a fact.
Humour me.

Name one.
:sorry:
...OK ... name another one.

Show an equivalent of an ABBA, or a Led Zeppelin or a The Who.
 
  • #72
DaveC426913 said:
Humour me.

Name one.
:sorry:
...OK ... name another one.

Show an equivalent of an ABBA, or a Led Zeppelin or a The Who.
The Who are an English rock band:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Who
 
  • Like
Likes DennisN and pinball1970
  • #73
  • Haha
Likes pinball1970
  • #74
phinds said:
Yes, but that's hardly ALL they did. If they had written great tunes but been crappy singers do you think that would have become so popular. Some of us just LOVE harmony groups. The Ames Brothers, The Kingston Trio (yes, I'm dating myself with those and a few more :smile:), The Everly Brothers, The Beach Boys, the Chad Mitchel Trio, Peter Paul and Mary, Simon and Garfunkel, Crosby, Stills, and Nash, The Mamas and the Papas, and on and on.
I was thinking of the Eagles, which was a popular group with many hits, as I listened to some Joe Walsh.

Certainly, Crosby, Stills, Nash with or without Neil Young.

Harmony, music and lyrics.
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970 and phinds
  • #75
Astronuc said:
I was thinking of the Eagles, which was a popular group with many hits, as I listened to some Joe Walsh.
Yeah, it occurred to me that I had left them out. I loved them.
 
  • #76
DaveC426913 said:
Thanks. I've fixed their errors. :woot:
Drat. It didn't stay fixed. Well, Wikipedia and I can agree to disagree.
 
  • #78
A live performance from ca 1979/1980... listen particularly to the live vocals from 1:14 - 1:57; the harmonies of the two girls are gorgeous, and then Agneta just ends the section with a superb high pitch, high energy glide/glissando at 1:54 - 1:56... it's incredible :biggrin:.

ABBA - Hole In Your Soul (from ABBA In Concert)
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970
  • #79
DaveC426913 said:
Drat. It didn't stay fixed. Well, Wikipedia and I can agree to disagree.
There ought to be no disagreement, other than British English is not Canadian English. You can write color and I can write colour, but we don't have to slug it out to see who's right.
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970
  • #80
PeroK said:
There ought to be no disagreement, other than British English is not Canadian English. You can write color and I can write colour, but we don't have to slug it out to see who's right.
Yeah, I did not realize it was actually a British convention to treat groups as collective nouns.

The wiki edit page has this comment: "are" (and other plural being verbs) is used for British English
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970 and PeroK
  • #81
DennisN said:
An interesting article, thanks!
And I did not know about Fridas dramatic life, that was pretty intense.
I did not know that much about their backgrounds. Freda terribly sad.
I know they all married then divorced.
 
  • #82
phinds said:
Ha. I taught her well :smile:
I thought Americans said, "I learned her good." ;)
 
  • #83
“The key to Abba is their understated Swedishness,” explains Carl Magnus Palm.

That explains everything and nothing!

The rest of the BBC article explains a lot more but I love that quote.

Anyway my claim is ABBA is great for a reason and like the Beatles they were great song writers. Point one.
The other part that other posters have referred to was the ABBA harmony which also gave them the "sound."
They had a great sound because they had two individual great voices that sounded perfect together and very similar to each other.

They could sing the same line together, not easy, the Beatles rarely did because it sounds messy. They preferred double tracking their own voice on a lot of tracks.
Clearly ABBA harmony was amazing, not surprising since they had such a good platform from which to play off, the fantastic tune and chords!
They used lots of tricks and I would like to know if the ladies contributed or was it all Benny and Bjorn?
Agnetha had written hit songs before so I would guess yes.
Ignoring what they look like (imagine radio only stars) that is why the music is so great. (To me)
 
  • #84
pinball1970 said:
I thought Americans said, "I learned her good." ;)
No, Americans don't but Amuricans do.
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970
  • #85
This is another favorite ABBA song of mine, "When All Is Said And Done", less famous and less successful than many of their other songs.

Though I have to put in a personal caveat: I don't think the production of it quite does the song justice. It is the third song on their last album "The Visitors" and maybe they weren't as motivated as before to do a top notch production, I don't know. I personally think the production could have been better (drums are ok, but could have been better, same with bass and some synth sounds).

Still, I often listen to songs "beneath" the production, so to say, to get the grasp of the core of the song itself.

And this song is an excellent song, in my opinion:
  1. The melodies are marvellous, they go up and down, backwards and forwards.
  2. The lead vocals AND the backing vocals are very good. Listen particularly to the backing vocals, they are exquisite!
  3. There's a cool, subtle yet effective effect on the lead vocals coming in at 1:56.
  4. The lyrics are really well written.
This song is also a great example of the peculiar ABBA quality of being happy and sad in the same song. The mood of the song is somewhere in between; somewhat melancholic but also joyful.
It is essentially a song describing a mature breakup.

ABBA - When All Is Said And Done
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970
  • #86
pinball1970 said:
The Tiger, listening to them with older ears again I have noticed the are absolute kings of middle eight and pre chorus.

"Yellow eyes are glowing....." Part.
That was one of my favorite songs when I was a teen. :smile:
I don't think I've heard it in 30 years, actually. :biggrin:

It's a good song, now when I heard it I particularly noticed the low key parts (with just vocals and piano), they are really, really good. It sounds almost a bit psychedelic in those parts, very cool!

Here's a cool live/semilive (?) version:

ABBA - Tiger - High Quality Audio from ᗅᗺᗷᗅ The Movie 1977 - Australia


Thanks for feeding my ABBA obsession, @pinball1970 !
I've tried to quit listening to them, but I can't. :biggrin:

I find it particularly interesting to listen to them nowadays from an analytical (musical) viewpoint; there is so much to learn from their songs regarding composition and production, in my opinion.
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970
  • #87
Ok, this is an ABBA thread, but I hope it's ok to post two of my favorite songs from Björn and Bennys musical "Chess"... I haven't heard them in a long time, and when I listened to them again I got goosebumps...
...they are so good:

Chess (Instrumental)
(1984)


I Know Him So Well
(1984) - from Chess, with Elaine Paige & Barbara Dickson
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970
  • #88
The distinctive sound of the Yamaha DX-7. It never really caught on.
 
  • #89
Hornbein said:
The distinctive sound of the Yamaha DX-7
I used to have one myself! :smile:
I never liked it, I used it only as a keyboard to control an external sound module.
The Yamaha DX-7 was a pain in the a** to program, let me tell you (and I can write computer programs :smile:).
Later I switched to a Roland JX-8P, which has a much better and warmer sound.
I still have got it, and it works perfectly.
 
  • Informative
Likes pinball1970
  • #90
DennisN said:
I used to have one myself! :smile:
I never liked it, I used it only as a keyboard to control an external sound module.
The Yamaha DX-7 was a pain in the a** to program, let me tell you (and I can write computer programs :smile:).
Later I switched to a Roland JX-8P, which has a much better and warmer sound.
I still have got it, and it works perfectly.
You would like our vocalist and key board player. They speak in a different language.

Them: The Korg.....( numbers and letters) Was great at (xyz) but not quite as good as the Roland (numbers and letters) but that had (ABC) issue.

The Rhodes obviously best for (.....)

Me: (wakes up) Randy Rhodes? I liked his technique but the shredding....

Everyone else: Sh.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes Hornbein and DennisN
  • #91
My girlfriend said I was extravagant for having three (cheap) keyboards. I showed her a guy who toured with 36. That seemed to quiet her down.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
  • Wow
Likes pinball1970 and DennisN
  • #92
Hornbein said:
My girlfriend said I was extravegant for having three (cheap) keyboards. I showed her a guy who toured with 36. That seemed to quiet her down.
Very funny!
Which keyboards are those three? It would be intersting to hear. :smile:
I've got five at home, three Midi keyboards, the JX8P and a darn heavy Kurzweil rompler in the basement (I got it for free). Total overkill, I've got to get rid of at least two keyboards, I think.

pinball1970 said:
Them: The Korg.....( numbers and letters) Was great at (xyz) but not quite as good as the Roland (numbers and letters) but that had (ABC) issue.
I had Korg synths early on, but I never quite liked them, compared to Roland.
pinball1970 said:
The Rhodes obviously best for
... Riders on the storm. 😊
 
  • Love
Likes pinball1970
  • #93
He didn't list them. He said they filled an entire semi truck trailer, which I cannot believe.
 
  • #94
Hornbein said:
He didn't list them. He said they filled an entire semi truck trailer, which I cannot believe.
No, I meant your three keyboards. 😊
 
  • #95
DennisN said:
No, I meant your three keyboards. 😊
Oh why not. Yamaha PSR 373 (unused) and 473, Roland go:keys 3 (sounds great for some things but user interface so terrible it's an insult. I can't wait to get rid of it.). I don't like expensive electronic keyboards because they are mostly about duplicating obsolete keyboards of the past, which I don't do. That's the market.

Lately it's common for bands to play along with recordings of keyboards. Sometimes the recording is better than the band. Maybe rock bands don't like the personalities of keyboard players.
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970 and DennisN
  • #96
pinball1970 said:
You would like our vocalist and key board player. They speak in a different language.

Them: The Korg.....( numbers and letters) Was great at (xyz) but not quite as good as the Roland (numbers and letters) but that had (ABC) issue.

The Rhodes obviously best for (.....)

Me: (wakes up) Randy Rhodes? I liked his technique but the shredding....

Everyone else: Sh.
Yep, that's exactly how it goes.
 
  • Haha
Likes pinball1970
  • #97
Another marvellous song by ABBA, I Have A Dream:
(a fun thing is that they used an electric sitar in this song)



This song sounds simple and is pretty simple, but it doesn't need anything more.
It is so powerful in its simplicity.

What I mean is it is a pretty simple composition, but the production is not simple; e.g. the final chorus was sung by 28 children.
 
  • #98
I couldn't think of a better thread than this one to post this (please don't hate me!):



(I know, I know, there is actually more piano than this in the original song)
 
  • Haha
Likes pinball1970
  • #99
jack action said:
I couldn't think of a better thread than this one to post this (please don't hate me!):



(I know, I know, there is actually more piano than this in the original song)

European classical art has a big emphasis on difficulty for its own sake. Simplicity that sounds good has a lot going for it.
 
  • #100
Hornbein said:
European classical art has a big emphasis on difficulty for its own sake. Simplicity that sounds good has a lot going for it.
That is very funny but you can hear the background keys when he is feigning being bored.
EDIT: SOS has some great keyboards, its central infact.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

2
Replies
55
Views
4K
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
44
Views
9K
Replies
35
Views
7K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
111
Views
13K
Replies
22
Views
12K
Back
Top