# Bee Gees and Beatles **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [November 12, 2010, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479 "2010-11-12T20:49:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**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:** [March 25, 2011, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/41 "2011-03-25T16:25:53Z")
> [@song\_dance](#): > > I would submit it’s a woeful lack of understanding by accepting such an ignorant comparison & taking it a step further by ignoring the facts. Many Beatles fans make the continued mistake that theirs was the only “revolutionary” music to come on the music scene. This is completely false, for starters, they had several contemporaries that produced sounds not heard of prior to their incarnations. > > Ray Charles and Sam Cooke brought their gospel & soul roots to music for the first time and truly began to show how versatile both singing/songwriting could be. And both gave us some of the most incredible music of the 1950’s and early 1960’s which is when the music we know today truly began to take shape. Motown had it’s own unique sound which was established due to the incredible songwriting of Smokey Robinson in particular and forever changed the course of music how it would be interpreted. The Impressions, led by Curtis Mayfield, created a beautifully laden sound of R&B, Jazz & R&R songs with Curtis’ powerful and socially conscious themes and deep, heartfelt lyrically content as to make them one of the most charted groups of the 1960’s. > > And Bob Dylan captured the attention of everyone with his truly masterful songwriting skills which were a heavy influence on the Beatles. These were the artists, amongst many others, who made music “popular” and laid the foundation for both the Beatles & the Bee Gees. I agree with Nostalgiascape, the Bee Gees wrote, in my opinion, the more deeply thought provoking songs such as “I started A Joke”. I would argue that it’s a woeful lack of understanding for anyone to twist the argument that the Beatles changed the culture into the argument that the Beatles were the only ones of any musical importance or that they weren’t influenced by others. Nobody’s arguing that. People have argued the exact opposite of that. In other threads I’ve argued that it was the breadth of the musical influences that the Beatles blended that put them above even their greatest competitors, who were more limited in their influences. Having lived through it is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, I felt the culture - the whole culture, not just the musical culture - change around me. On the other, my knowledge is tainted by being too young to appreciate the influences that I learned about only later. And everybody has a special love for their first special music. When I try to combine those memories with history I get a different picture than the one you present. Rock ‘n’ roll was dying as a genre. Motown was just beginning to take off. Dylan was still doing folk. Ray Charles was moving away from soul and r@b into a smoother sound. Most “white” stations never played “black” music to any great extent in the first place. The integration of radio, where Americans got around 99% of their music from, slowly grew over the 60s, but that was a result of the rock revolution and not a cause of it. If you were a teen in the 60s you heard primarily Top 40 stations. In some cities you might have “black” stations to listen to. You occasionally saw a group on television. You might be lucky enough to see a group live. (No arenas then, of course. Small theaters only.) You may have contact with someone older who collected albums. But mostly it was Top 40 radio. If it wasn’t there it didn’t exist. Top 40 existed in 1963. I know: I listened to it. After Feb. 9, 1964, when The Beatles appeared on Ed Sullivan, everything changed. Really. Overnight. It’s not just nostalgia. The world shifted on its axis. There’s been nothing comparable in music since. ---
**Author:** ![Lynn\_Bodoni](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e47c2d/32.png) [@Lynn\_Bodoni](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lynn_Bodoni)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/42 "2011-03-25T16:26:40Z")
The rock genre would have been much poorer and sparser if The BEATLES had never existed. Possibly it wouldn’t even exist today, it might have completely died out. The BeeGees put out some good music, but they didn’t explore and expand the field nearly as much as The Beatles did. The Beatles did a lot of experimentation, and they put out some really crappy songs, but they had so many really wonderful songs that I’m willing to ignore “Why Don’t We Do It In The Road”. The BeeGees found a couple of formulas that worked well for them, and then that’s what they did. Or at least, that’s what they put out. I like the BeeGees. But when I’ve switched playing devices (records to tapes to CDs) I will buy Beatles music again. I think I have one cassette of the BeeGees, while I have most Beatles music in all three formats. The Beatles are what I’m going to listen to over and over again. I’ll dig out the BeeGees now and then, put on a record, and give them a listen…but it’s pretty rare. The Beatles give me far more listening pleasure. ---
**Author:** ![song\_dance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9de0a6/32.png) [@song\_dance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/song_dance)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2011, 6:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/43 "2011-03-26T06:06:29Z")
To say that the latter argument has not been made is showing great ignorance, yes many have made such an argument and it’s not factual. And this nonsense that they had some breadth of musical influences that apparently was lacking in others is ridiculous as well. People such as Sam Cooke, Ray Charles, Duke Ellington, Stevie Wonder study and performed Jazz, Classical, R&B, Gospel, Soul, etc. That type of ignorance is insulting. While I agree that most of the stations weren’t playing black artists due to their prejudice, that doesn’t mean their music wasn’t being heard. The Beatles amongst many other white artist were singing and performing their songs because the material was better than what was being played on the radio and changing the way other artists though of and viewed music composition. This was the foundation that the Beatles found themselves performing upon and when they did Sullivan, these were the songs they were mostly performing. That’s not an accident. Music was first changed in the 1950s with artists like Chuck Berry, Buddy Holly, Sam Cooke, etc. This is when music was forever changed and led to the what was to come in the 1960s. UOTE=Exapno Mapcase;13613846]I would argue that it’s a woeful lack of understanding for anyone to twist the argument that the Beatles changed the culture into the argument that the Beatles were the only ones of any musical importance or that they weren’t influenced by others. Nobody’s arguing that. People have argued the exact opposite of that. In other threads I’ve argued that it was the breadth of the musical influences that the Beatles blended that put them above even their greatest competitors, who were more limited in their influences. Having lived through it is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, I felt the culture - the whole culture, not just the musical culture - change around me. On the other, my knowledge is tainted by being too young to appreciate the influences that I learned about only later. And everybody has a special love for their first special music. When I try to combine those memories with history I get a different picture than the one you present. Rock ‘n’ roll was dying as a genre. Motown was just beginning to take off. Dylan was still doing folk. Ray Charles was moving away from soul and r@b into a smoother sound. Most “white” stations never played “black” music to any great extent in the first place. The integration of radio, where Americans got around 99% of their music from, slowly grew over the 60s, but that was a result of the rock revolution and not a cause of it. If you were a teen in the 60s you heard primarily Top 40 stations. In some cities you might have “black” stations to listen to. You occasionally saw a group on television. You might be lucky enough to see a group live. (No arenas then, of course. Small theaters only.) You may have contact with someone older who collected albums. But mostly it was Top 40 radio. If it wasn’t there it didn’t exist. Top 40 existed in 1963. I know: I listened to it. After Feb. 9, 1964, when The Beatles appeared on Ed Sullivan, everything changed. Really. Overnight. It’s not just nostalgia. The world shifted on its axis. There’s been nothing comparable in music since. [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2011, 7:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/44 "2011-03-26T07:45:37Z")
Anyway . . . why the hate for Richard Simmons? ---
**Author:** ![Baron\_Greenback](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baron_greenback/32/48_2.png) [@Baron\_Greenback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baron_Greenback)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2011, 11:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/45 "2011-03-26T11:42:22Z")
> [@casdave](#): > > As for not being much of an influence on disco, nah, they were the main players, and you can often hear echoes of their style in more recent material. They were players, for sure, but more than say, Chic, Donna Summer or Earth Wind and Fire? ---
**Author:** ![Cicero](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cicero/32/3594_2.png) [@Cicero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cicero)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2011, 12:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/46 "2011-03-26T12:32:06Z")
I went to a Bee Gees concert around 1970 in Brisbane. I liked them then. I can’t stand the voices now- as if they have all been castrated. I still like the Beatles. ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2011, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/47 "2011-03-26T13:23:36Z")
Comparing them is absolutely possible and not futile. A group with #1 hits in 5 different decades has to be doing something right. I really like the Bee Gees and clearly understand that The Beatles are much better…but The Beatles are much better than almost everybody else. “Ha, ha, your car isn’t as fast as my Bugatti Veyron you turtle!!!”. I’m gonna thow another SDMB’s hated groups in the mix: ABBA. They massively kick the ass of almost anyone under Led Zeppelin’s class. Yeah, the Bee Gees aren’t as goos as The Beatles, but they are a first-rate group. ---
**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:** [March 26, 2011, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/48 "2011-03-26T14:53:21Z")
> [@PunditLisa](#): > > I wouldn’t sneeze at any band that has sold as many albums as the Bee Gees.\ > [@PunditLisa](#): > > BeeGees record sales: 220 million > Three Dog Night record sales: 40 million Anyone who equates popularity with quality immediately loses all credibility to me. mmm ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2011, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/49 "2011-03-26T16:01:21Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > I’m gonna thow another SDMB’s hated groups in the mix: ABBA. They massively kick the ass of almost anyone under Led Zeppelin’s class. I’ll go with that. My favourite bands are The Who, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, The Clash, The Jam. And I put ABBA close on their heels in terms of quality output. ---
**Author:** ![PunditLisa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/4af34b/32.png) [@PunditLisa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PunditLisa)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2011, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/50 "2011-03-26T16:20:54Z")
> [@Mean\_Mr.Mustard](#): > > Anyone who equates popularity with quality immediately loses all credibility to me. Popularity that spans over 5 decades? Get some perspective, dude. ---
**Author:** ![Ximenean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/aca169/32.png) [@Ximenean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ximenean)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2011, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/51 "2011-03-26T16:27:05Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > I’ll go with that. My favourite bands are The Who, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, The Clash, The Jam. And I put ABBA close on their heels in terms of quality output. Didn’t Pete Townshend once say that “SOS” was the best pop song ever written, or something? I’m not sure I would go quite that far (I think he was addressing Bjorn Ulvaeus at the time, so we’ll allow him some hyperbole), but it is a fantastic song, and recording, by anyone’s standards. If memory serves, John Lennon also spoke of it approvingly. ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2011, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/52 "2011-03-26T16:35:11Z")
As other posters have said, The Beatles changed everything. The bass, lead guitar, rhythm guitar, drums format became a standard. They paved the way from “Joe Schmoe and the Schmoettes” to the concept of a band. Sgt Pepper and the White Album popularized the album as a creative entity rather than a collection of songs. They helped usher in the use of psychedelics and Indian mysticism. I don’t know what lasting changes the Bee Gees brought either to society or music. ---
**Author:** ![Taomist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/53a042/32.png) [@Taomist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Taomist)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2011, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/53 "2011-03-26T18:09:44Z")
Funny timing on this thread. Today at work, a young guy asked me who I thought was the better band, the Beatles or the Bee Gees. I laughed for about five minutes as he went on about how the Bee Gees were far superior. Then he started humming “Wouldn’t It Be Nice”, as an example of one of the Bee Gees’ great and enduring songs. I’m still laughing my ass off. ETA: I can’t comment critically on music, as I just ‘know what I like’. So for me, the Beatles win out by dint of variety. While I absolutely love, love love some of the Beach Boys songs, I haven’t been arsed to hear all of them, so about 70 percent of what I do hear sounds kind of all the same. I’ve probably been exposed to more Beatles, and so have likely heard more variety. ---
**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:** [March 26, 2011, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/54 "2011-03-26T18:29:07Z")
> [@PunditLisa](#): > > Popularity that spans over 5 decades? Get some perspective, dude. Seriously? You believe that popular = good? mmm ---
**Author:** ![cochrane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cochrane/32/10441_2.png) [@cochrane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cochrane)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2011, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/55 "2011-03-26T18:46:58Z")
> [@Taomist](#): > > Funny timing on this thread. > > Today at work, a young guy asked me who I thought was the better band, the Beatles or the Bee Gees. I laughed for about five minutes as he went on about how the Bee Gees were far superior. Then he started humming “Wouldn’t It Be Nice”, as an example of one of the Bee Gees’ great and enduring songs. > > I’m still laughing my ass off. Blasphemy! “Good Vibrations” is the greatest Bee Gees song ever. It’s Barry Gibb’s masterpiece. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Lynn\_Bodoni](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e47c2d/32.png) [@Lynn\_Bodoni](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lynn_Bodoni)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2011, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/56 "2011-03-26T18:53:14Z")
> [@](#): > > While I absolutely love, love love some of the Beach Boys songs, I haven’t been arsed to hear all of them, so about 70 percent of what I do hear sounds kind of all the same. I’ve probably been exposed to more Beatles, and so have likely heard more variety. I like the Beach Boys, and I’ve probably heard all or at least most of their songs, and enjoyed them. But they DO have a definite sound, and they don’t have nearly as much variety in their songs as The Beatles did. Now, if you’re in the mood for the Beach Boys sound, then you can put on any one of their albums, and you’ll get a pretty consistent set of songs. But put on a later Beatles album, and you might get anything from Dear Prudence to Helter Skelter. ---
**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:** [March 26, 2011, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/57 "2011-03-26T19:47:28Z")
> [@Lynn\_Bodoni](#): > > I like the Beach Boys, and I’ve probably heard all or at least most of their songs, and enjoyed them. But they DO have a definite sound, and they don’t have nearly as much variety in their songs as The Beatles did. Now, if you’re in the mood for the Beach Boys sound, then you can put on any one of their albums, and you’ll get a pretty consistent set of songs. But put on a later Beatles album, and you might get anything from Dear Prudence to Helter Skelter. Well, yes and no. If you look at the progression from, say, _Meet the Beatles_ to \*Revolver \*to _Abbey Road_ you’ll see about the same growth as the progression from \*The Beach Boys Today \*to _Pet Sounds_ to _Holland_. Yes, the Beatles did more experimentation. They could also get away with more because they had more clout than any other group. Record companies had a very heavy hand in those days. The Bee Gees could never have done a disco sound in the 60s. ---
**Author:** ![Spice\_Weasel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spice_weasel/32/5435_2.png) [@Spice\_Weasel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spice_Weasel)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2011, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/58 "2011-03-26T23:10:19Z")
> [@Mean\_Mr.Mustard](#): > > Seriously? You believe that popular = good? > > mmm I suppose that depends on how we’re measuring. ‘‘Good’’ is an entirely subjective judgment. By whose standards do we judge good music? Or more to the point, why _shouldn’t_ we judge good music by majority opinion? Don’t get me wrong - I hate Nickelback as much as the next guy, but I think there is a significant difference between when something is popular now vs. 50 years from now. Nobody told me to love the Beatles as a twelve year old in 1995 - I just listened, and loved. And I’m not alone in that respect. When your own generation loves your music, it’s one thing - but when successive generations find something to connect with and _emulate_ - that’s quite another. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2011, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/59 "2011-03-26T23:27:06Z")
The fact that the Bee Gees willingly involved themselves in the abomination known as disco taints the entire spectrum of their musical output. It’s like that metaphor for entropy: _If you add a teaspoon of fine champagne to a barrel of sewage, what you have is a barrel of sewage. And if you add a teaspoon of sewage to a barrel of fine champagne, what you have is…a barrel of sewage._ A musicologist might be able to compartmentalize the individual pieces and consider them apart from the body of work as a whole. However, as I am not a musicologist, I have no reason to expect that such an exercise would be a profitable use of my time and energy. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2011, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479/60 "2011-03-26T23:32:54Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > The Bee Gees could never have done a disco sound in the 60s. Because nobody had shown them how yet, right? 😃 ETA: because of the fact that they took to it like cancer to a prostate I do not consider this any kind of a contradiction to what I posted above. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bee-gees-and-beatles/560479.md?page=4)