The Beatles were not a super duper amazing group. They were a boy-band before there were boy-bands. In that sense they were innovators and are the grandfathers of N’Sync.
George Martin made them sound good and Brian Epstein marketed them like they were a commodity - which is exactly what they were. They were produced, packaged and sold just like Coca-Cola.
No one cites an individual Beatle as an influence. Find someone that says Lennon or McCartney influenced their writing, McCartney was an influence as a bassist, George Harrison influenced their guitar work or Ringo on the drums.
The band itself was an influence to people that grew up in the era of payola and few choices for radio listening. Yes, people that grew up listening to the Beatles said they were an influence. Certainly.
But next to no one that didn’t grow up with them cites them. Why? Because none of them were really that good. The sacredness of the Beatles lies in a combination of zeitgeist and marketed gestalt.
Almost half of their first three albums were covers.
Some of their most famous songs were thefts and they got successfully sued for it.
What innovations they are credited for weren’t innovations they were just the first time a commercial band used them.
I don’t seny their influence on people that had little choice and I don’t deny the effect of nostalgia but objectively they were, at best, on par with the best of their time and, mostly, subpar.
Please understand that I like a lot of the Beatles’ stuff. I don’t hate the Beatles.
I just recognize them for what they were, accept them as such, and don’t buy into Beatles’ worship.
Zeke