# Beatles - Not Even Close To The Best Group Ever. **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [August 19, 2016, 9:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280 "2016-08-19T09:43:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/41 "2016-08-19T22:08:49Z")
Love Kris but he has one of the worst voices in a professional musician ever. Is this a joke? Leonard Cohen is not one of the greatest bands in the world. Or singers, or even songwriters. Great first LP. Contra your assertion Elvis didn’t write any songs to speak of. You fail on that. I want to hold your hand, she loves you are great rock and roll songs. If you think they aren’t you must have been born very recently and invented your aesthetic by reading web threads or else you are just confused about the logical sequences of cause and effect. Maybe downloading too much without any context or knowledge about what led to what. This is what is irritating. Not that you don’t like the Beatles, but that you move the goalposts constantly and refuse to address any points correcting false assumptions you are peddling. The thread is that the Beatles aren’t great. But you are really attacking those who love them for loving them more than you would like them to. Too bad. They are right. These songs are how the Beatles became famous. Not Their first three Lps, or cover songs of others. Timing was accidental. They would have been great regardless of time. The marketing was a mad gold rush that the Beatles didn’t even profit from. It wasn’t marketing for them any more than for anyone else. Meaning: You fail on that assertion. Bob Dylan heard those songs and said that it was where music had to go, “the chords were outrageous and the harmonies made it all valid” Your favorite acts list is so all over the place it’s hard to figure out whether it’s real or not. ---
**Author:** ![Purd\_Werfect](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e47c2d/32.png) [@Purd\_Werfect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Purd_Werfect)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/42 "2016-08-19T22:09:14Z")
I don’t understand where all these people are that are insisting you must revere and lionize The Beatles. If you start a thread on a subject, then yeah, people will offer their opinions. And you did start the thread for just that purpose I assume. Is anyone telling _you_ that you have to consider The Beatles to be the best of all time? Are you accosted at parties and the like and called unclean and blasphemous? I’m seeing some people in this thread calling you on trivializing them (really, like them or not, but to consider them as nothing more than a boy band? That seems a tad overstated), but no one is saying you have to change your lineup of fave musicians. ---
**Author:** ![Zeke\_N.Destroi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/4af34b/32.png) [@Zeke\_N.Destroi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeke_N.Destroi)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/43 "2016-08-19T22:10:29Z")
> [@Typo\_Negative](#): > > Los Angeles radio.‘[Breakfast with the Beatles](http://breakfastwiththebeatles.com/)’ has been on the air every Sunday morning for 32 years. 32 goddamned years in the nation’s 2nd largest media market!!! (it went _nationa_l in 2008) > > Similar weekly programs can be heard in Chicago, Philadelphia, Buffalo, Miami/Ft. Lauderdale, Phoenix, Boston, New York, Baltimore, Ithaca, Harrisburg/York, Tampa Bay, Cambridge, Dayton, Denver, Seattle, Baja California, and San Diego. Pretty much anywhere people listen to the radio. Check the demographics. I’ll bet they don’t include many people born after 1980. > [@Hamlet](#): > > I couldn’t agree more. It is arguable that the Beatles are overrated, but to say completely silly, and inaccurate, things like: “no one cites an individual Beatle as an influence” and “none of them were really that good” tells me that I can easily dismiss this opinion. So give me a cite - not one from a Beatles related event - where any Beatle has been listed as an influence. Give me one. I’ve listened to a great number of musicians give interviews and they are all asked about their influences so it shouldn’t be hard. > [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > Ah, I’m starting to think that this explains the OP: he thinks they _are_ mutually exclusive, and that if an artist is popular, that proves they can’t be any good. Not at all. I grew up on pop-pablum.I love NKOTB, Paul Abdul, Milli Vanilli, Vanilla Ice, Snow etc. You name a pre-packaged pop group and it is likely that I owned at least one album at some point. Popular does not equal shitty. Just the same as popular does not equal good. Harry Potter (for instance) was popular but not shitty (not great literature but no one ever pretended it was.) Twilight was popular and shitty; see also 50 Shades of Grey. Popularity does not denote quality or lack thereof. That’s pretty much one of my man points. Just cause lots o’ people love it doesn’t mean it’s great. > [@Typo\_Negative](#): > > Your argument fails on it’s face. Boy Bands are flash in the pans, pretty much by definition. The Beatles played the instruments. They wrote the songs. They wrote hits for other artists. They sold 600 million records. That trumps any argument you can come up with. Really? They didn’t write the songs - please quit pretending that they did - look at the discography, look at the writing credits and you’ll see that, as I’ve said, they didn’t always. And even if they did so fucking what? Yay for them? Gillions of people before them wrote their own songs and gillions of people after them have done the same. Yay for them I guess? The same goes for playing their own instruments - yay! That’s baseline shit. They weren’t the first they weren’t the last. Or are suggesting that Chuck Berry (and his band) didn’t? What about Woody Guthrie? Or are you suggesting that merely being able to sing (without playing your own instruments) is lacking? If so then I’d refer you to any number of operatic singers and / or musical performers. I’ve never seen Tevyeh break out a fiddle on stage. I’m sorry, your point was? > [@](#): > > The Beatles’ popularity is unmatched in it’s fervor and in it’s longevity. Gosh, the fervor thing sounds familiar… so does the longevity. Ever heard of The Bible? Seems to me that Beatles fans and God-botherers are on about equal footing: 1)It must be great because look at the sales 2)Criticism must be ignored or - better yet - shouted down by “but so many people love it” 3)repeatedly ignoring huge gaping holes in the accepted narrative. Yup, fervor sounds about right. So does zealotry. > [@](#): > > The haven’t recorded as a group in 40 years, half of them are dead, and they are _still_ getting new fans. Their music has been used to sell commercial products, their music has been used as a basis for multiple films and stage productions. There are 4 or 5 Beatles tribute bands touring nationally. > > Care to guess what song has been recorded more times by more artists than any other? I’ll give you a hint. > [sub]It’s a Beatles song.[/sub] Hate to tell you this Sparky but the fact that they have continued to be commercialized doesn’t really bolster your argument. As to getting new fans… you wanna bet that the number dwindles every year? Seems to me that a poster here is doing his best to indoctrinate one of his kids and failing. I know anecdote doesn’t equal evidence. And there are countless fucking tribute bands to countless fucking bands. 4 or 5 Beatles tributes? How many Cher tributes do you think there are? More than 4 or 5? Oh so Cher must be the greatest. Her or Elvis. > [@Telemark](#): > > Even if you remove the “bubblegum” moniker (which isn’t accurate) they pop they created wasn’t vapid or disposable. It was well crafted, innovative, and has stood the test of time. There’s nothing wrong with producing really good pop music and if that’s all The Beatles did they’d still have been a great group, just not the force they eventually became. It is vapid and disposable and it is bubblegum. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. A great pop song is a great pop song. I can give you any number of great pop songs that are vapid and disposable. That doesn’t mean they aren’t great pop songs it just means that they are what they are and pretending that they are anything other is simple pretention. > [@F.U.Shakespeare](#): > > I don’t generally respond to things like this OP, because I respect peoples’ musical tastes. But the part I’ve quoted above is demonstrably false. The Beatles’ “5 boldest ripoffs” contain exactly one instance (the similarity of the melody and one line of lyrics in “Come Together” to Chuck Berry’s “You Can’t Catch Me”) of the Beatles being sued for infringement. And the other four claims are… interesting. Please read further [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_plagiarism#Successful_suits_and_settlements) I’ll grant that the Beatles were not responsible for the He’s So Fine / My Sweet Lord one (it was only a Beatle) but still twice in a seven year career - that’s not bad. And regardless your opinion there was at least one judge (and possibly 12 jurors) that found twice that they were plagiarists. Maybe you know more about it than they did. I sure don’t. > [@](#): > > …Whoever wrote that article for _Rolling Stone_ knows nothing about songwriting, or is pretending not to. To update the old joke: What do you call a guitar player who knows two chords? A music journalist. Cool, so I can utterly discount the post above that cited the “100 greatest Beatles Songs” from Rolling Stone? Decent. I already had but it is always nice to have an ally. BTW I’ll bet that whatever you did (I’m assuming you’re retired) had a joke about it unless it was mundane enough to not be worthy of one. Don’t slag all journalists be they music or otherwise. If it weren’t for them you wouldn’t know quarter of the shit you do. Sometimes names do say it all. I don’t hate the Beatles and I don’t think they suck. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/44 "2016-08-19T22:16:41Z")
> [@Zeke\_N.Destroi](#): > > And I’d bet that when they diverged their bubblegum fans ignored them and they developed different fans. The saying “you’re entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts” never seemed more pertinent. You don’t know what you’re talking about. I was 13 when the Beatles appeared on Ed Sullivan. They changed everything. Nobody at the time thought they were bubblegum. They were the dictionary definition of rock music. Nobody thought they were a boy band. Yes, they had a huge following of young teenagers. That’s because they brought those huge numbers into the market as nobody before had. Teens are often the first to get a new trend. Older teens had moved over into folk music. They hated the Beatles and had to be slowly wooed back. But folk died a hideous death and rock boomed. The Beatles’ audience stayed with them as they matured, and matured along with them. The Beatles changed music in 1964. And in 1965. And in 1966. And in 1967. They were the leaders, the innovators, the benchmark against which every other band measured themselves. (Individuals had Dylan, the only other innovator and leader who can been spoken of in the same terms.) buddha\_david is also wrong. The British _A Hard Day’s Night_ is their first mature album, although it was harder to tell that by the American version. 1965’s _Rubble Soul_ and 1966’s _Revolver_ are their best albums and the ones with the highest level of innovation. \*Sgt. Pepper’s \*was the peak of rock music being a single all-encompassing worldwide event. Nothing can ever compare to that because the music world fragmented immediately afterward. Every one of those albums was consumed by the same 13-year-olds who saw them on Ed Sullivan. Say whatever you like about how good The Beatles were. Nobody cares about your obviously uninformed opinion. But your facts are insulting to anybody who knows or cares about music and rock history. They’re begging to be demolished and I’m happy to dance up and down on them. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Great\_Unwashed](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_great_unwashed/32/4791_2.png) [@The\_Great\_Unwashed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Great_Unwashed)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/45 "2016-08-19T22:27:36Z")
> [@Zeke\_N.Destroi](#): > > They didn’t write the songs - please quit pretending that they did - look at the discography, look at the writing credits and you’ll see that, as I’ve said, they didn’t always. And even if they did so fucking what? Yay for them? You keep saying this: of their first albums: (1963) Please Please Me : 14 songs 8 original (1963) With The Beatles: 14 songs 8 original (1964) A Hard Day’s Night: 13 songs all original (1964) Beatles for Sale: 14 songs 8 original (1965) Help!: 12 songs 11 original (1965) Rubber Soul: 14 songs all original (1966) Revolver: 14 songs all original (and very few covers (if any) after) ---
**Author:** ![minlokwat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/minlokwat/32/2844_2.png) [@minlokwat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minlokwat)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/46 "2016-08-19T22:30:34Z")
> [@Zeke\_N.Destroi](#): > > So give me a cite - not one from a Beatles related event - where any Beatle has been listed as an influence. Give me one. > > I’ve listened to a great number of musicians give interviews and they are all asked about their influences so it shouldn’t be hard. [Article](http://www.rockcellarmagazine.com/2014/02/04/top-11-musicians-influenced-by-the-beatles-50th-anniversary/#sthash.8yqBk0r2.dpbs) [Video](http://www.grammy.com/videos/black-sabbath-love-for-the-beatles) That was easy. ---
**Author:** ![EinsteinsHund](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/einsteinshund/32/8400_2.png) [@EinsteinsHund](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EinsteinsHund)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/47 "2016-08-19T22:32:04Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > I wonder if the OP was even alive when the Beatles started. I was, and when they came to New York they dominated everything. Any marketer who knew how to do that would be making a fortune. > Sure a lot of their very early songs were covers. The interesting thing was how few were. Early Stones and even Who were covers also - but most of the Beatles really big hits (She Loves You, I Saw Her Standing There) were not. > > There were plenty of choices for radio listening then - no FM AOR, but no albums worth playing. There were a lot of variety hits which showed how bad things were. Payola existed to get crap records on the air. Even at 11 years old I knew how bad things were then. I strongly suspect that without the Beatles rock would have died out within a few years. > And the OP never mentions how the Beatles pioneered the move from the simple love or protest song to the amazing diversity of music on their even greater albums. **The true mark of genius is throwing away the style that succeeded to move to a new one. They did it, Dylan did it, I’m not sure who else.** [Emphasis mine] I agree with everything you said, but there were others. Compare for instance [1964 successful Kinks](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTTsY-oz6Go) to [1967 successful Kinks](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3VDATV6dmY), a VERY different kettle of fish. ETA: the OP is just silly. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/48 "2016-08-19T22:37:12Z")
> [@Zeke N. Destroy](#): > > Why can Beatles fans not accept that not everyone lurvs them some Beatles? **Why do Beatles fans feel the need to browbeat non Beatles fans?** > > Enjoy the fucking Beatles, love them to death. Kiss your Ringo picture goodnight every morning. I don’t fucking care. Just stop insisting that[everyone must revere them](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aYN5XpWzpM) as you do. > > **Here’s a challenge for y’all. You hit me with the best lyrics the Beatles ever had and I’ll promise you that I can give you much better.** I’ll stay contemporary. :rolleyes: (bolding done to emphasize the obvious hypocrisy) ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/49 "2016-08-19T22:42:57Z")
> [@Zeke\_N.Destroi](#): > > I appreciate you and I checked out and actually read / watched your cites. > > But… the Dave Grohl one was at a book launch for Ringo Star’s autobiography. Of course whoever is up there is going to lay on accolades - **that’s what they’re being paid for**. And **Grohl said he got the book \_ not heard the music - when he was six**. > > That’s like saying DR. Seuss was a huge influence on Chuck Palahniuk because the first book he read himself was Cat in the Hat. (bolding mine) First bolding: do you have a cite that Dave Grohl was paid for his attendance at this event? :dubious: Second bolding: you’re wrong. You’re utterly wrong. You’re so wrong it calls into question whether or not you actually watched and listened to this video. Here’s a challenge for you: why don’t you transcribe what (you think) was said by Dave Grohl in that video and post it here? ---
**Author:** ![Mean\_Mr.Mustard](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mean_mr.mustard/32/3865_2.png) [@Mean\_Mr.Mustard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mean_Mr.Mustard)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/50 "2016-08-19T22:51:44Z")
> [@Zeke\_N.Destroi](#): > > The Beatles - Not even close to the best group ever. Well, I’m glad that’s been resolved. \*\*Zeke \*\*is currently working on his next thread: “Water - It’s Not Really All That Wet.” mmm ---
**Author:** ![The\_Great\_Unwashed](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_great_unwashed/32/4791_2.png) [@The\_Great\_Unwashed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Great_Unwashed)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/51 "2016-08-19T22:52:19Z")
> [@Zeke\_N.Destroi](#): > > Here’s a challenge for y’all. You hit me with the best lyrics the Beatles ever had and I’ll promise you that I can give you much better. I’ll stay contemporary. Here’s a rather pertinent couplet: _Living is easy with eyes closed Misunderstanding all you see_ BTW Zeke, speaking as a fellow fan of The Kinks, Dylan, Cohen and Simon, but also as someone who tends to believe that The Beatles reputation is possibly over-stated, I don’t think you’re presenting a particularly coherent case – and your headline: > [@](#): > > Beatles - \*\*Not Even Close \*\*To The Best Group Ever is laughable, and not helped at all when you risibly include the likes of Guns ‘n’ Roses, Kris Kristofferson, The Police, Metallica, Offspring, Emimem, and Anthrax as possible contenders. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/52 "2016-08-19T22:58:23Z")
And even if we grant that the Beatles were the first bubblegum-pop boy band, what’s wrong with that? That means that they managed to originate a completely new genre of music: Few musicians can make that claim. And they didn’t stop there, but also went on to pioneer another new genre of music, and did very well in a few others. They’re like the Einstein of music. ---
**Author:** ![kenobi\_65](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kenobi_65/32/13178_2.png) [@kenobi\_65](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kenobi_65)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/53 "2016-08-19T23:05:45Z")
> [@Zeke\_N.Destroi](#): > > If you are talking about bands that use the Beatles’ style give one - other than Oasis. At the time of the Beatles’ breakup, Jeff Lynne and Roy Wood of The Move were inspired to start to create music that would, in their own words, “pick up where the Beatles left off.” They created Electric Light Orchestra, which Lennon himself referred to as “Sons of the Beatles.” ---
**Author:** ![Enter\_the\_Flagon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b9bd4f/32.png) [@Enter\_the\_Flagon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enter_the_Flagon)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/54 "2016-08-19T23:10:52Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > They’re like the Einstein of music. Einstein - weak, overrated product of marketing. Didn’t even write his own theories. ---
**Author:** ![Nonsuch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nonsuch/32/2922_2.png) [@Nonsuch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nonsuch)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/55 "2016-08-19T23:13:07Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > And even if we grant that the Beatles were the first bubblegum-pop boy band, what’s wrong with that? That means that they managed to originate a completely new genre of music: Few musicians can make that claim. And they didn’t stop there, but also went on to pioneer another new genre of music, and did very well in a few others. They’re like the Einstein of music. At the time, **every** band was a “boy band,” unless it was full of girls, in which case it was a “girl group.” Even Frank Sinatra, when he started out in the 1940s, was looked down on as a purveyor of music for juveniles. The OP has no understanding that there was no such thing as “adult rock music” when the Beatles came on the scene — all rock and roll was music for teenagers. Ironically, the Beatles (along with Bob Dylan) were the ones most responsible for establishing the very idea that a rock group could appeal to a sophisticated audience — the OP is bizarrely trashing the Beatles for supposedly failing to live up to the standards they themselves established. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/56 "2016-08-19T23:16:00Z")
You know who didn’t include all original songs on their first album? The Who Bob Dylan Simon & Garfunkel The Rolling Stones The Kinks The Yardbirds (not one!) Cream The Beach Boys Buddy Holly Jerry Lee Lewis Them The Byrds The Doors The Animals The Band The Grateful Dead The Allman Brothers Jefferson Airplane Duane Eddy Creedence Clearwater Revival Bob Marley and the Wailers all of Motown others (I got tired) ---
**Author:** ![EinsteinsHund](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/einsteinshund/32/8400_2.png) [@EinsteinsHund](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EinsteinsHund)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/57 "2016-08-19T23:25:27Z")
> [@Zeke\_N.Destroi](#): > > Are you talking tribute bands? If so then there are tonnes of them. For Christ’s sake Journey has tribute bands. If you are talking about bands that use the Beatles’ style give one - other than Oasis. > [@kenobi\_65](#): > > At the time of the Beatles’ breakup, Jeff Lynne and Roy Wood of The Move were inspired to start to create music that would, in their own words, “pick up where the Beatles left off.” They created Electric Light Orchestra, which Lennon himself referred to as “Sons of the Beatles.” Also obviously Badfinger. Gosh, people thought that [Come And Get It](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3TOcw7taBo) WAS a Beatles song (ok, it was a McCartney composition). Of course Badfinger were also crucial to power pop, which is so obviously modeled from '64-'66 Beatles, so add Big Star et al. to the bands that are unthinkable without the Beatles. And that’s only the most direct musical influence, the greater musical influence and the cultural impact of the Beatles up to today are unquestionable. ---
**Author:** ![LC\_Strawhouse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e19adc/32.png) [@LC\_Strawhouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LC_Strawhouse)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/58 "2016-08-19T23:39:48Z")
I’m vaguely positive on the Beatles but I love arguments like this because there is too much tiresome Baby Boomer nostalgia which assumes the Beatles catalog is about as important to human civilization as the discovery of electromagnetic waves. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/59 "2016-08-19T23:51:33Z")
> [@LC\_Strawhouse](#): > > I’m vaguely positive on the Beatles but I love arguments like this because there is too much tiresome Baby Boomer nostalgia which assumes the Beatles catalog is about as important to human civilization as the discovery of electromagnetic waves. And they’d be wrong. It’s _more_ important. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Zeke\_N.Destroi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/4af34b/32.png) [@Zeke\_N.Destroi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeke_N.Destroi)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2016, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280/60 "2016-08-20T00:07:31Z")
> [@](#): > > …blah blah blah So the people that bought into it then continued to buy into it and therefore yada yada ya. Have anything to say that others haven’t? > [@The\_Great\_Unwashed](#): > > You keep saying this: of their first albums: > > (1963) Please Please Me : 14 songs 8 original > (1963) With The Beatles: 14 songs 8 original > (1964) A Hard Day’s Night: 13 songs all original > (1964) Beatles for Sale: 14 songs 8 original > (1965) Help!: 12 songs 11 original > (1965) Rubber Soul: 14 songs all original > (1966) Revolver: 14 songs all original > > (and very few covers (if any) after) So about 25% of their stuff wasn’t theirs. And even if it was 100% theirs who cares? Writing your own stuff is BASELINE. Why do they get special credit for doing what any angsty 9th grader does? They wrote 3/4 of their own stuff yay for them. I think Leonard Cohen (for instance) did write 100% of his own stuff. No why no one points that out? Because it’s fucking exceptional. Why why why does the best band ever get special accolades for doing some of their own writing? Why? > [@minlokwat](#): > > [Article](http://www.rockcellarmagazine.com/2014/02/04/top-11-musicians-influenced-by-the-beatles-50th-anniversary/#sthash.8yqBk0r2.dpbs) > > [Video](http://www.grammy.com/videos/black-sabbath-love-for-the-beatles) > > That was easy. Your first cite is specifically aimed toward Beatles admiration. And even that is weak. “We used to air guitar to them” “We talked about them.” You second is Ozzy saying he wanted to be the Beatles to get out of his life and Geezer saying, “They had accents like us. They were working class blokes” \<– paraphrase. So wherein lies the influence? And I said show a musician that has cited A Beatle as an influence (Lennon singing / lyrics, McCartney bass / lyrics / singing, Harrison guitar, Ringo drums.) Lest I be accused of moving the goal-posts I will remind that these are the criteria I have always laid out. I want unsolicited, non-Beatles love-in cites. Bad Example: So how did the Beatles influence you? Well the Beatles were a major band and I heard them when I was a kid and yeah. Good Example: So who were your musical influences? Well I’d say that Paul McCartney certainly influenced my bass playing with the way he worked chords. Jesus Christ even the Joe Walsh example doesn’t work He outright says he heard a McCartney baseline, practised it, asked how it was done and was told it was done in the studio with 2 tracks. Then Walsh learned to do it himself. WTF is that supposed to prove? > [@Mean\_Mr.Mustard](#): > > Well, I’m glad that’s been resolved. > > \*\*Zeke \*\*is currently working on his next thread: “Water - It’s Not Really All That Wet.” > > mmm Mean Mister Mustard (lousy song) is working on his next thread Tits on a Fish: How to be as Useful as. > [@The\_Great\_Unwashed](#): > > Here’s a rather pertinent couplet: > _Living is easy with eyes closed > Misunderstanding all you see_ If called on by a panther Don’t anther. Your point? Wait, I think I get it. You are suggesting that I’ve reached the conclusion that the Beatles aren’t the greatest because I’ve had my eyes shut man. Like I need to open them dude. See the universe. I grew up on the Beatles. I heard them all the time. I listened to my brother mourning Lennon getting shot. I know the fucking Beatles. I’ve always liked them but they’ve never been top 10. What is it with you Beatles people that you assume that anyone who doesn’t revere them is either blind or stupid? You realize that you all come off as condescending and bullies right? I mean really, I don’t think you’re band hung the stars and thus I should be insulted? For a group of supposedly brilliant people you sure act like back alley thugs sometimes. And that’s okay. You all are pixels and thus don’t matter so I don’t much care but I just thought I should point out your hypocrisy. You all fucking hate bullies until you have the chance to be one. Cool I get it - big monkey takes fruit from small monkey small monkey punches smaller monkey (Heinlein - Stranger In a Strange Land) so monkey away. I mean really. I accept that the title was a bit over the top but you people have been acting like I fucked your wives. You’ve been snotty, dismissive, insulting and bullyish. And once one has done it the next feels free to add on. Check your fucking selves. If this is how worked up you get about a band then you have problems. And you know what? it isn’t just me. [unrelated rant] I dare you smug self-affirmed tolerant people to check how often you have ganged up on and bullied people because they have a different point of view. You’d set fire to someone that mocked a mentally challenged person on the street but here you beat **John Clay** so mercilessly that he got banned for his own good. For the most part you are a bunch of shrunk-nut thugs that just want to band together and thump something to make your collective selves feel like champs. And if you’ve got anything to say about that you can take it to the fucking pit but leave it out here cause this is the “The Beatles Ain’t the Best Thread” [/unrelated rant] [/unrelated rant] > [@](#): > > BTW Zeke, speaking as a fellow fan of The Kinks, Dylan, Cohen and Simon, but also as someone who tends to believe that The Beatles reputation is possibly over-stated, I don’t think you’re presenting a particularly coherent case – and your headline: > is laughable, and not helped at all when you risibly include the likes of Guns ‘n’ Roses, Kris Kristofferson, The Police, Metallica, Offspring, Emimem, and Anthrax as possible contenders. Defend yourself you laughable nit GnR released probably the most meaningful album of the 80’s it pretty much ended hair bands, Kris Kristofferson is a lyrical genius who has been covered by something like 400 people / groups. The Police (aside from some pretty brilliant lyrics) introduced North America to ska. The Offspring is just cool and funny. Eminem revolutionized rap and Anthrax (aside from some pretty funny words) invented rap-metal. So I’m sure you had a fucking point but I don’t know what it was. Doorknob. Zeke [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-not-even-close-to-the-best-group-ever/763280.md?page=4)