Are The Beatles the greatest band of all time?

[Helter Skelter]

It's The Beatles. So many great songs and albums. The White Album has some pure rock tracks which are up there with Led Zep and such. In the White Album they rocked harder than The Stones and Pink Floyd, imo.

They had the right balance between pop and rock, which is why they were very popular and critically acclaimed. Also very experimental on Revolver and Sgt Pepper which started the idea of a concept album.

Plus, they were great lads.

 

[Brighton TID]

It's not ridiculous at all in my opinion. It's the songs themselves. They haven't dated half as well as some of their contemporaries. Their earlier stuff - Help, Hard Day's Night, Ticket To Ride, I Saw Her Standing There - just sound....well...I'm not sure but I wouldn't choose to listen to it. I agree that it's certainly much better by the time they got to the White Album and Abbey Road and I love Something, You Never give Me Your Money but....but...but...most of the tunes are just not half as timeless as some of the other bands of that era. I'm not denying their influence nor their appeal nor their talent. Well...maybe I'd question Paul McCartney's song-writing. Someone should have applied a much stricter filter to the stuff put out in his name.

Take any of those tracks and record them today with modern production techniques and trendy enhancements and they would not sound dated.
They only used 2 guitars, a bass and drums for crying out loud.
That is always going to sound dated against modern syths and processed sounds.

 

[GT49er]

You'd have to have lived before and during the Beatle years to realise just how great their impact was, not just on pop music, but also on popular culture. They completely turned the music industry on its head - yes, of course they had their influences, but they influenced an entire generation.
Pre-Beatles, Tin Pan Alley ruled popular music; professional (mostly middle aged) songwriters would churn out run of the mill tunes (although to be fair they did manage the odd good one occasionally), producers would search out good looking boys (and occasionally girls) to record them, backed by session musicians, who were often also middle aged and didn't quite 'get' it. The Beatles swept all that aside in a few devastating years.
Sadly, the old ways have largely re-established themselves now - ie Britain's got (supposedly) Talent. Simon Cowell - the new Larry Parnes?

 

[Brighton TID]

It's not ridiculous at all in my opinion. It's the songs themselves. They haven't dated half as well as some of their contemporaries. Their earlier stuff - Help, Hard Day's Night, Ticket To Ride, I Saw Her Standing There - just sound....well...I'm not sure but I wouldn't choose to listen to it. I agree that it's certainly much better by the time they got to the White Album and Abbey Road and I love Something, You Never give Me Your Money but....but...but...most of the tunes are just not half as timeless as some of the other bands of that era. I'm not denying their influence nor their appeal nor their talent. Well...maybe I'd question Paul McCartney's song-writing. Someone should have applied a much stricter filter to the stuff put out in his name.

Take any of those tracks and record them today with modern production techniques and trendy enhancements and they would not sound dated.
They only used 2 guitars, a bass and drums for crying out loud.
That is always going to sound dated against modern syths and processed sounds.

 

[Buzzer]

Take any of those tracks and record them today with modern production techniques and trendy enhancements and they would not sound dated.
They only used 2 guitars, a bass and drums for crying out loud.
That is always going to sound dated against modern syths and processed sounds.

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this. I still listen regularly to the Beatles greatest early influence, Buddy Holly. I'm a huge fan of his and although the production is iffy the tunes are a pleasure to listen to. I just don't feel the same about the first 3 Beatles albums. They just seem to annoy me because they're so...I'm not sure.

Sorry but there is something about the songs that I don't care for. Abbey Road, Revolver, White Album is a different matter. I'll happily concede that although I do stand by my assertion that their music even from the later years hasn't aged so well as other bands from that era.

And just to re-iterate, I'm not saying the early albums were poor. I'll stop digging!

 

[Buzzer]

Actually...just to prove that I do love the way the Beatles have infuenced music I can't recommend highly enough an album titled 'I Am Sam' - inpired by the soundtrack to the film. It's interpretations of Beatles classics by such people as Howie Day, Aimee Mann, Nick Cave, Eddie Vedder, Neil Finn from Crowded House Sheryl Crow...the list goes on and on. Check out Eddie Vedder's take on "You've Got To Hide Your Love Away". Stunnng

 

[BadFish]

Actually...just to prove that I do love the way the Beatles have infuenced music I can't recommend highly enough an album titled 'I Am Sam' - inpired by the soundtrack to the film. It's interpretations of Beatles classics by such people as Howie Day, Aimee Mann, Nick Cave, Eddie Vedder, Neil Finn from Crowded House Sheryl Crow...the list goes on and on. Check out Eddie Vedder's take on "You've Got To Hide Your Love Away". Stunnng

Just listening to this and it is wonderful. However, to argue your earlier point that their songs have not aged well, it must be noted that this version is incredibly close to the orgininal. The voice is clearly different and the production sharper and more modern. For me this example is backing up Brighton TID's assertion that Beatles songs would not dated if given the modern treatment.

There are of course many examples of Beatles songs that do sound, and will always sound dated.

The thing with the Beatles for me is that because they stand astride so many genres and styles it is hard to discuss them. What is undoubtedly true for one song is not necessarily for another. The thing that I don't think can be denied is their influence over popular music, they continue to be name checked by band after band. I think this is precisely because they have such a wide ranging repertoire and such quality that most people will (if they choose to look) find something that they like.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

They had the right balance between pop and rock, which is why they were very popular and critically acclaimed. Also very experimental on Revolver and Sgt Pepper which started the idea of a concept album.

Woody Guthrie did the first concept album in the 40's, Dust Bowl Ballads.

Even in the 60's they weren't the first. The Beach Boys Pet Sounds was the concept album that inspired The Beatles. The Kinks also had the concept album Face to Face out before Sgt Peppers.

 

[Insel affe]

Woody Guthrie did the first concept album in the 40's, Dust Bowl Ballads.

Even in the 60's they weren't the first. The Beach Boys Pet Sounds was the concept album that inspired The Beatles. The Kinks also had the concept album Face to Face out before Sgt Peppers.

Nail

Head

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Actually...just to prove that I do love the way the Beatles have infuenced music I can't recommend highly enough an album titled 'I Am Sam' - inpired by the soundtrack to the film. It's interpretations of Beatles classics by such people as Howie Day, Aimee Mann, Nick Cave, Eddie Vedder, Neil Finn from Crowded House Sheryl Crow...the list goes on and on. Check out Eddie Vedder's take on "You've Got To Hide Your Love Away". Stunnng

Daniel Johnson sang You Got to Hide Your Love Away when we saw him at the Concorde. Brought a lump to my throught that did. The Beatles version doesnt though.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Woody Guthrie did the first concept album in the 40's, Dust Bowl Ballads.

Even in the 60's they weren't the first. The Beach Boys Pet Sounds was the concept album that inspired The Beatles. The Kinks also had the concept album Face to Face out before Sgt Peppers.

Nail

Head

I'm not sure the point is about whether who was first, but undoubtedly in terms of a mainstream audience, Sgt. Pepper changed the way record companies and indeed the public viewed the idea of a concept album. Ray Davies had to cut a fair amount of his linking together of tracks on Face to Face as the record company were worried it wouldn't sell - and it didn't sell that well even edited into a more conventional format. Had the Kinks recorded Face to Face post Sgt. Pepper, no doubt Ray would have been able to produce exactly what he wanted.

As for Pet Sounds and Sgt. Pepper, who could argue one way or another for these two amazing albums. However, Pet Sounds again as with Face to Face did not enjoy initial commercial success. No doubt Pet Sounds proved a massive influence on The Beatles, but it was Sgt. Pepper that changed the landscape of making concept albums and what could be achieved.

It has been said that while Wilson was recording the ill fated Smile Sessions, on first hearing Sgt Pepper he wept, supposedly on feeling it was a record he could not better. Personally, Pet Sounds is up there as one of my all time favourites, God Only Knows is an incredible record that is as fresh today as it was in '66.

So I'd always take it that while claims of The Beatles inventing the concept album is not true, I think it's fair to say they established it's success and were a starting point for a lot of what was to come.

 

[Icy Gull]

Any other older NSCers remember the 1968 concept offering from The Small Faces - Ogden's Nut Gone Flake which came in a rather cool oversized tobacco tin

And the Zombies Odyssey and Oracle did this actually precede Sgt Pepper? This album is a mostly forgotten gem imo, I think the lack of enthusiasm for it, at the time, resulted in the break up of the band?

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

You'd have to have lived before and during the Beatle years to realise just how great their impact was, not just on pop music, but also on popular culture. They completely turned the music industry on its head - yes, of course they had their influences, but they influenced an entire generation.
Pre-Beatles, Tin Pan Alley ruled popular music; professional (mostly middle aged) songwriters would churn out run of the mill tunes (although to be fair they did manage the odd good one occasionally), producers would search out good looking boys (and occasionally girls) to record them, backed by session musicians, who were often also middle aged and didn't quite 'get' it. The Beatles swept all that aside in a few devastating years.
Sadly, the old ways have largely re-established themselves now - ie Britain's got (supposedly) Talent. Simon Cowell - the new Larry Parnes?

Spot on. I was 10 in 1963, when the Beatles emerged. I can remember listening to Alan Freeman's chart programme on the Light Programme at 5pm on a Sunday, and all the tedious stuff that was on it pre Beatles, and how things suddenly got a lot more exciting and interesting from then on. I would put it alongside the emergence of Rock and Roll in the 1950's, or the emergence of Punk in the 1970's

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Any other older NSCers remember the 1968 concept offering from The Small Faces - Ogden's Nut Gone Flake which came in a rather cool oversized tobacco tin

And the Zombies Odyssey and Oracle did this actually precede Sgt Pepper? This album is a mostly forgotten gem imo, I think the lack of enthusiasm for it, at the time, resulted in the break up of the band?

Ogden's Nut Gone Flake with the whole story narrated by Stanley Unwin - a masterpiece.

 

[Insel affe]

Spot on. I was 10 in 1963, when the Beatles emerged. I can remember listening to Alan Freeman's chart programme on the Light Programme at 5pm on a Sunday, and all the tedious stuff that was on it pre Beatles, and how things suddenly got a lot more exciting and interesting from then on. I would put it alongside the emergence of Rock and Roll in the 1950's, or the emergence of Punk in the 1970's

I am sorry but just because radio stations only played tedious or tame music does not mean that bands and music available was bland or boring. If anything I think because the Beatles had the right management and they had the right connections it reaffirms my stance that the Beatles were the first truly manufactured British boy band. As we all know from day one radio stations played safe music that did not offend anyone, and with songs like love love me do..... bingo, this does not mean they are the best or worst band ever.

 

[Icy Gull]

I am sorry but just because radio stations only played tedious or tame music does not mean that bands and music available was bland or boring. If anything I think because the Beatles had the right management and they had the right connections it reaffirms my stance that the Beatles were the first truly manufactured British boy band. This does not mean they are the best or worst band ever.

I thought Boy Bands were thrown together by record companies, given an image and then given songs to sing. I think you'll find the Beatles served their apprenticeships in Hamburg playing clubs having originally formed, under a different name in 1958. Their first hit was in 1963. I think you are talking rubbish and the first boy band was the Monkees.

I take it you were not around to appreciate the effect the Beatles had on music and the enormous amount of bands from Liverpool and Manchester who followed in their footsteps. Boy Band indeed

Name me a Boy Band who can play all the instruments and write ground breaking songs.

 

[Insel affe]

I thought Boy Bands were thrown together by record companies, I think you'll find the Beatles served their apprenticeships in Hamburg playing clubs having originally formed, under a different name in 1958. Their first hit was in 1963. I think you are talking rubbish.

You are right, and so am I in my opinion as the British were looking for a safe Rock`n`Roll band and the Beatles were it already in place and ready to go, hardly any grooming music, dynamics all in place just needed tweeking with the drummer and new haircuts and suits and bobs your uncle..... Safe Boy Band for the masses.

Just an opinion and I am probably wrong.

 

[Icy Gull]

You are right, and so am I in my opinion as the British were looking for a safe Rock`n`Roll band and the Beatles were it already in place and ready to go, hardly any grooming music, dynamics all in place just needed tweeking with the drummer and new haircuts and suits and bobs your uncle..... Safe Boy Band for the masses.

Just an opinion and I am probably wrong.

Wrong, although if you were talking about Cliff Richard and the Shadows, I might agree with you.

 

[FamilyGuy]

You are right, and so am I in my opinion as the British were looking for a safe Rock`n`Roll band and the Beatles were it already in place and ready to go, hardly any grooming music, dynamics all in place just needed tweeking with the drummer and new haircuts and suits and bobs your uncle..... Safe Boy Band for the masses.

Just an opinion and I am probably wrong.

There were a lot of bands around that were "safer" than the Beatles, all (most?) of whom disappeared during "The Mersey Beat" period.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

I'm not sure the point is about whether who was first, but undoubtedly in terms of a mainstream audience, Sgt. Pepper changed the way record companies and indeed the public viewed the idea of a concept album. Ray Davies had to cut a fair amount of his linking together of tracks on Face to Face as the record company were worried it wouldn't sell - and it didn't sell that well even edited into a more conventional format. Had the Kinks recorded Face to Face post Sgt. Pepper, no doubt Ray would have been able to produce exactly what he wanted.

As for Pet Sounds and Sgt. Pepper, who could argue one way or another for these two amazing albums. However, Pet Sounds again as with Face to Face did not enjoy initial commercial success. No doubt Pet Sounds proved a massive influence on The Beatles, but it was Sgt. Pepper that changed the landscape of making concept albums and what could be achieved.

It has been said that while Wilson was recording the ill fated Smile Sessions, on first hearing Sgt Pepper he wept, supposedly on feeling it was a record he could not better. Personally, Pet Sounds is up there as one of my all time favourites, God Only Knows is an incredible record that is as fresh today as it was in '66.

So I'd always take it that while claims of The Beatles inventing the concept album is not true, I think it's fair to say they established it's success and were a starting point for a lot of what was to come.

IMO, to be truly considered the greatest, a band should have been right at the forefront of innovation and going places other bands hadn't gone before.

Connecting all of the dots in music history they always seemed to be following up others concepts. Very well mind you. Though having something else to base a concept on means it's easier to produce something more polished.