Eh, their early stuff helped set the template for modern pop music and their later stuff help set the stage for a lot of rock music after that and honestly, most white people don't even think they're the greatest band ever, but they are among the most influential.
I used to think the same thing @ThaRealness but they are really talented.
1. Influence
They changed the way "pop music" developed. From the ways Albums and Singles were put together and marketed to band structure and persona. And they experimented, helping to turn the easier shoo-wop band music into the eclectic mid-to-later sixties and seventies.
2. Songwriting
The lead two are two of the most prolific hit writers history - although Lennon writes music with more substance McCartney is unparalleled almost in writing catchy POP tunes, riffs and hooks. McCartney could get serious as well and was probably a marginally better singer. There was some overlap in what they could write as sometimes it was hard to tell who wrote what. Lennon was more about the blues, more about the riffs, more guitar driven, more soul and not-so rhyme focused to the detriment of art as McCartney. Lennon was skiffle/mod-ish compared to the blander pop of McCartney.
At the end of the day if there was no Lennon the Beatles would not have had the depth. No McCartney and they would probably have been too heavy for most people and McCartney headlined both Sgt. Pepper's and Abbey Road - two of their greatest. McCartney is also responsible for their most iconic Pop songs/hits.
3. Voices
They had more vocal range than you might think. McCartney and Lennon have the 9th and 13th greatest vocal range out of all major modern pop-stars.
Only Ringo didn't have the talent to become iconic in his own right. There were three geniuses in that band of 4.
5. Timelessness
These songs were mostly written over 50 years ago and still sound fresh. That in itself is amazing. Which other band from 50 years ago has tons of records which sound as contemporary as the Beatles' works.
If you want to understand the Beatles start at Lennon and move back to McCartney later. Then Harrison.
And when you are ready for McCartney start here. But it only works if you LISTEN to it from start to the end.
Saying all that you also have to remember that their audience does not feel soul like some others do. An audience which is focused on the technical and the Beatles are one of the most technically preeminent bands of all time whether you like their music or not. Watch their videos on youtube and they are full of people decomposing their music in a way you don't see with contemporaries like the Stones and others.
I used to think the same thing @ThaRealness but they are really talented.
1. Influence
They changed the way "pop music" developed. From the ways Albums and Singles were put together and marketed to band structure and persona. And they experimented, helping to turn the easier shoo-wop band music into the eclectic mid-to-later sixties and seventies.
2. Songwriting
The lead two are two of the most prolific hit writers history - although Lennon writes music with more substance McCartney is unparalleled almost in writing catchy POP tunes, riffs and hooks. McCartney could get serious as well and was probably a marginally better singer. There was some overlap in what they could write as sometimes it was hard to tell who wrote what. Lennon was more about the blues, more about the riffs, more guitar driven, more soul and not-so rhyme focused to the detriment of art as McCartney. Lennon was skiffle/mod-ish compared to the blander pop of McCartney.
At the end of the day if there was no Lennon the Beatles would not have had the depth. No McCartney and they would probably have been too heavy for most people and McCartney headlined both Sgt. Pepper's and Abbey Road - two of their greatest. McCartney is also responsible for their most iconic Pop songs/hits.
3. Voices
They had more vocal range than you might think. McCartney and Lennon have the 9th and 13th greatest vocal range out of all major modern pop-stars.
Only Ringo didn't have the talent to become iconic in his own right. There were three geniuses in that band of 4.
5. Timelessness
These songs were mostly written over 50 years ago and still sound fresh. That in itself is amazing. Which other band from 50 years ago has tons of records which sound as contemporary as the Beatles' works.
If you want to understand the Beatles start at Lennon and move back to McCartney later. Then Harrison.
And when you are ready for McCartney start here. But it only works if you LISTEN to it from start to the end.
Saying all that you also have to remember that their audience does not feel soul like some others do. An audience which is focused on the technical and the Beatles are one of the most technically preeminent bands of all time whether you like their music or not. Watch their videos on youtube and they are full of people decomposing their music in a way you don't see with contemporaries like the Stones and others.
wierd al yankovic said beatles are the only musicians he would never do a novelty record of because he respects them too much. dude is a dck they have one great song, then when they split it was geroge and john who were the hit makers.
In my household, The Temptations were considered the greatest group ever, and correctly so. No one in the wack ass Beatles could carry David Ruffin or Paul Williams dirty laundry. I legitimately never heard of no CAC ass Beatles until I was in my teens. Only certain demographics consider them the “greatest”
I know too much about the Beatles and I could school all of yall to this shyt
if you can prove you can play guitar ill really break shyt down because you would have to actually be a musician to debate creating and writing actual music
Yellow Submarine was a soundtrack album, you just posted the Intro basically
And also the time period where they were incredibly high on LSD making songs for a cartoon
just to drop a few gems before we get into it, Beatles weren't just "a white band" they werent from America... you cant look at them as American off rip
The first few albums were filled with covers like most bands back then and they mastered playing small clubs on uppers drunk as fukk. Everything was normal at that point
Most acts werent putting full originally written albums out, just singles and hits, especially not in pop music... because pop music is popular music. It's not a real genre of music
Like Muddy Waters had songs in blues and etc.... people had a lane. Beatles put together well written cohesive originally written full albums when nobody really was...They were using
a much different structure and sound basically creating Pop music just off swag. They didnt just stick to one style of music at all, but whatever genre they went for... they made the pop version of it.
Not only that, they directed highly produced promo videos which led to "Music Videos" And threw full length movies to go with the full albums ... this was like 1963 way before anyone. They never stayed comfortable
and everytime they were stereotyped Lennon or Mccartney would completely turn left and go against the grain.
One of the most amazing facts is, these nikkas were playing full stadiums solo before anyone with 100$ amps to 30k people... and not missing a beat... that shyt is extraordinarily hard fam... you would not be able to hear yourself singing or playing at all with a full band of people. Imagine doing a rap show with a 100$ amp and a mic plugged in to a baseball field full of people. They criticized the Queen and shyt on UK... they came to America and said fukk the racism and inequality in America and Lennon from 1970 - 1980 hung with black panthers and completely shyt on USA without even being a legal citizen here.
I could break down like 10 pages of shyt the Beatles did for hit music, they donated and created prototypes for the first cell phone, the MRI machine etc. They always gave credit where it was due and gave props to their heros... I can see how people wouldnt like the Beatles or not understand but in a 7 year window, they literally created the full album, the original composition album, the music video and promotional roll out and music based movie picture. They werent rock music, or psychedelic music or blues band... they were literally just a pop band ... they pioneered making perfect bops
everytime they said "Well you cant talk about drugs, or you cant talk about whores" they found a creative way to make hooker anthems or weed songs... if you know you knowwww
they also were the first to count in on songs (1,2,3,4!) alot of the cueing up and techniques were later used to blend records and help create a better radio program
Miles Davis is one of the other people that changed music this much... Chuck Berry etc.
There's like a 10 page list of shyt you can directly attribute them for bringing. Other rock bands like the Stones are one trick pony's or following the lead... alot of them just blatantly ripping black music off, Beatles were making pop music with classical instruments and shyt, throwing trombone and brass sections over straight pop. John Lennon's whatever get's you through the night directly influenced the Saturday Night Live theme song ...without Beatles, there is no Purple Rain and shyt like that.
psychedelic rock - doowop mash up with blues foundation
come on fam
mcartney and lennon had amazing harmonies on tracks vocally
john and ringo inventing drum and bass music in 1965 and putting it on a huge album with no fukks given
killing their demo at 17 years old ... complete different style of music every song
I'm outnumbered so I won't debate. But I'll just say I love the Beatles. The thing about them is that I think most people including myself before explorering their music associate them with that corny 50s beach style music which is what made them popular during their "beatlemania" boy band years. But their stuff after Rubber Soul is the classic stuff worth listening to.
Also they got a few songs with soul including some covered by folks who sung music with "soul"
I have this debate all the time with my lil brother. Every time I see him
The first thing we do is catch up. The second thing I do is shyt on The Beatles
Look, musically there is a major red flag with The Beatles. They let guitar and vocals lead the beat, and the drums are a metronome. You could literally take the percussion out of every Beatles song it would sound just as good. The Beach Boys have the same problem. A lot of those 60s rock groups were so caught up in songwriting they forgot about the fukking beat.
The Who are even worse offenders because they were supposed to be edgy and unpredictable. But they still lean on that early 1960s 'metronomic' approach to drumming.
Rolling Stones are better, because at least they tried to change their ways. they were cold in the 70s
The Doors - I literally forget that they have a drummer
Every Southern Rock band could groove
The Band was funky as fukk.
The Allman Brothers were one of the most soulful groups to walk the earth.
Little Feat gave us Shook Ones Pt 2.
the Grateful Dead were wonky, but they were so high on acid and happy I always give em a pass
they had high production values (they were very musically talented btw) and very good marketing
the music sounds milquetoast because it's the origins of basic modern pop
most of their tracks aren't for me, but i prefer actual blues, punk, or rock when im in the mood from that period of time but older folks fell in love with that basic pop sound and back to the marketing bit, their music was radio ready over almost any other artist in their heyday
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
