Do the Beatles get too much credit..

Mascodagama wrote: I prefer onion Ringos.

Onion Ringos and a glass of Lennonade.

Of course I read the first post...but apparently ...if you don't have a sense of humor..it just ain't funny.

Ok honestly

SteveG wrote: Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: Ok honestly One masterpiece.....Abbey Road. One great album.....Let it be Two good albums...Sgt Peppers and White. One decent album...Revolver Forgettable.............Everything before Revolcer Two aberrations......Magical Mystery Tour and Yellow Submarine  Revolver? Decent? Look at all the forgettable pop that was around in 1966!

Edited by rogerthat - March 26 2020 at 06:43

Even the god of Prog ...Robert Fripp said he was influenced by the Beatles:

I of course agree and have all along that the Beatles were massively influential, I don't think that should be in dispute, the central question is, have The Beatles been given too much credit as innovators and originators?

Again, I think, like with most things, the Beatles are both overrated and underrated by individuals.

One can't discount the personal experience of many artists, and I would not dispute that the Beatles had a tremendous effect on many musicians and on music. A favourite album of mine is William Sheller's Lux Aeterna, the Beatles changed his life, and as he relayed it, while at music conservatory studying formal classical/ art music, his teachers were very disappointed.

Now I would have to see the context, but if you take this as a contained statement (no additional info or context needed): "Everyone was influenced someone. But everyone was influenced by the Beatles" (Alice Cooper), then he is overrating the Beatles. That is a claim that could not be substantiated, and in fact easily could be proven false. It comes across as hyperbole. That said, of course he didn't literally mean everyone,.

I have heard ludicrous claims made by people about the significance of the Beatles. Clearly some have underrated them and others have overrated them, it would amaze me if it could be otherwise as we are not omniscient, and often not rational nor intelligent creatures.

Edited by Logan - March 27 2020 at 20:02

I think Cooper´s statement is true when thinking sixties. Beatles were then everywhere and I think you couldn´t avoid their influence even if you had wanted. Ian Anderson has said he wasn´t influenced by the Beatles, although he liked them. I understand his point, he wanted to make Jethro unique, so he wanted to get influences to his band from much more rare artists. But I think he also couldn´t at least unconsciously avoid Beatles-influences. Beatles were masters of the sad melodies, these same kind of melodies I hear for example Jethro`s "Alive and Well & Living In", "Life`s a Long Song" & "Really Don´t Mind"-part in Thick as a Brick.

SteveG wrote: Revolver? Decent? Look at all the forgettable pop that was around in 1966!

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - March 28 2020 at 02:05

dr wu23 wrote: "The Beatles are the reason I'm a musician." -Sting, The Police

Those b*****ds have a lot to answer for.

rogerthat wrote: The entirety of his ratings above are highly debatable, to say the least.  I know no Beatles fan who rates Let It Be above Sgt, White album or Revolver. Let It Be had potential but combined with the brass gloss of Phil Spector turned into a rather soporific affair.

Do you know there's something called personal taste?

Taste is not debatable.

BTW: I'm not a Beatles fan.

P.S. Spector saved Let it Be from oblivion, the work he did with Across the Universe is brilliant.