The Beatles were the only musical act in history that was *simultaneously* the most popular, the most innovative, the most musically/culturally influential and one of the most alternative/subversive/psychedelic/"weird" of their time. On top of that, they were prolific songwriting geniuses who successfully explored more musical styles than most people even know exist, some of which they created themselves or greatly developed. They wrote about 230 original songs in 7 and a half years, many of which are widely considered all time classics. Most of these songs are completely different from one another, yet they form cohesive albums with different atmospheres that are unique to each. They had a perfect musical chemistry between them and complemented each other effortlessly. The 4 of them were extremely charismatic, each in their own way, and had very different personalities that balanced each other very well. These are all objective facts that, combined, makes them the greatest band of all time regardless of subjective musical taste or things like marketing. Everything else is secondary to those facts when it comes to why they are widely regarded as the best.

@LoveOneAnotherHeSaid

2 күн бұрын

You go much too far.

@sombra1111

Күн бұрын

@@LoveOneAnotherHeSaid No, I really don't.

@BeatlesFan1975

Күн бұрын

​@@sombra1111you are spot on. The Beatles are the greatest ROCK band of all time. Anyone who gives them a chance will love them.

My mother told me a story of how when she and my father were young, they went to 'see' the Beatles when they came to play Bristol in the UK. They spoke of a seething mass of people who came and gathered on mass throughout the city central areas. A massive crowd of excited people all hoping to just get a glimpse of them. The majority of people obviously didn't have tickets, or indeed, a hope to get to see them, but they came anyway. She said the crowds were huge wherever they went. This would have been around 64 or 65, so right at the height of Beatlemania. She said she had never seen anything like it before or since. It was like the whole city turned out to try and catch a glimpse of the Fab Four. Apparently, they stuck their head out of an upper story window in the venue to wave at the crowd in the centre of town and people lost the plot. Girls screaming, totally manic, fainting, all sorts of mayhem. An unprecedented crowd of thousands and thousands of people. This was the scene everywhere they went at that point. For those of us not there at the time it's mind boggling to think of that level of hysteria now, it just hasn't happened like that for a musical group since. It's hard to pin down a straight forward and succinct reason for this phenomena. It's a kind of an alchemy of those exceptional times. The relatively freshness of the Rock 'n' Roll/Popular/Youth/Culture/Music scene, coupled with the demographic of post war children and the quickly advancing times, mores and culture, the sexual revolution, the record industry in general, the new, and readily accessible, burgeoning consumer tech of the time, changing attitudes, and so many more myriad reasons as to why The Beatles hit it big the way they did. We may never see the like of this kind of thing again. It seems impossible in today's environment, I'd love to be wrong about that, but it does seem doubtful in todays culture somehow. It's quite the miracle taken in retrospect. I still listen to them now. (I'm 54) My kids love them too, as I made the music available to them when they were little. I hope their music will live on perpetually as there's such a magic to it.

@alfching2499

17 күн бұрын

Bloody hell it’s almost a kindle you wrote

@BugRib

16 күн бұрын

But better than most directly published works on Kindle Books.

@tonyoandkitty

16 күн бұрын

Awesome detail, I appreciate your level of detail and insight! For those of us who are a bit older and have something beyond a ten second attention level, we don’t mind having to read a longer tract, it’s well worth it!

@ashevillekathy

9 күн бұрын

I agree but think it’s really that they were that good, genius good. True genius doesn’t come along and be recognized that often.

@weswright118

4 күн бұрын

Great comment. I love your insight and interpretation of those times. I was only about 6 when they came to America, but of course heard all about them, at every turn. A phenomenal event that will most likely never happen again.

Brian definitely helped; but Paul McCartney was asked in a 1980 interview, “When did you know that The Beatles were more than just a good group, but a phenomenon?” Paul’s answer surprised me: “It was in Hamburg. We’d get a gig in a certain bar that wasn’t doing much business with the bands they’d had, and in a few weeks, people were coming in droves. This happened in every bar we contracted with in Hamburg. We all felt we must be doing something right!” This was of course long before they’d met Brian.

@BugRib

16 күн бұрын

Interesting!

@yowzephyr

16 күн бұрын

Yeah, the Beatles were hot before Brian. But Brian slicked them up into these beautiful Martians. I mean I was 8 when they first appeared on the Ed Sullivan Show, and to me they looked like these beautiful, exciting Martians. Or Vulcans. The Beatles then kinda looked like what would become Spock on Star Trek. Pause at 22:56 to see what I'm talking about.

@BobSperber

16 күн бұрын

I bit my lip until the end of the video to see if you would finally “go there” and you did. You came close to what I was thinking by mentioning Steve Jobs. The larger point is that Beatlemania happened just as the boomers were coming of age and there was a high degree of coherence in the media and pop culture surrounding that giant market. And the music was the “social medium.” today, there is no such coherence in our splintered societies. if there is such a resurgence in public consciousness, that is the time we will see a new “idol.” hopefully it is not a narcissistic or fascist politician who knows how to grab the reins of public consciousness. The Beatles did a lot of good while they had those reins. RIP Brian Epstein, also George Martin for his indispensable talent in the studio).

@randybackgammon890

15 күн бұрын

​@@BobSperberThe Beatles,whatever they were before and after,were never so phenomenal as during the Epstien years

@johntiae1

15 күн бұрын

For me beatles are the greatest band because no band is tight as they are, playing in a concert without a monitor infront of shouting and screaming audience is already very impressive

In January 1964 I was 6 years old and loved music. I listened to the radio every day, suddenly a song came on and I jumped up from my chair and literally ran to the radio. I was hearing a song that sounded like it was from another planet and I couldn't believe how incredibly good it was! I had no idea who it was but I knew I somehow needed to hear it again, and soon I did. I want to hold your hand was radically different than anything else at the time. I didn't know about the hype. I didn't even know what The Beatles looked like but they suddenly exploded and life was never the same.

@Kieop

19 күн бұрын

Yeah, the Beatles -- and Paul McCartney too as a solo artist -- seem to have a magical allure to very young children. James was a teenager when he first heard the Beatles in the 90s and wasn't impressed. I was 2 when I first heard them on the radio, so when I discovered them by name, my reaction was more, so THAT's who made the music I already love.

@hulagirl.kailua

17 күн бұрын

I know exactly what you are talking about...same thing happened to me. I was sitting cross legged on my bed doing homework when "I want to hold your hand" came on the radio KFWB for the first time in late 1963. I was 14. Electricity literally shot through my entire body, and continued to have the same affect until November of 2001 when George died. I had not seen them, had never heard of them, was hearing the song for the first time, and I was dumbfounded. They are still, to this day, the music of my life let alone my youth. I raised my kids and grandsons on their music...especially George Harrison's. Never talked to anyone before that had a visceral reaction to them like I did. Thank you for that.

@alanpoland7688

15 күн бұрын

With me, I was building an AMT model kit….𝒮𝒽𝑒 ℒ𝑜𝓋𝑒𝓈 𝒴𝑜𝓊 came on this old, ratty am radio I was listening to in ‘63 in our basement and like, 𝓦💥𝓦….been listening to this radio since about ‘55, started w 𝓔𝓵𝓿𝓲𝓼..then 𝓣𝓱𝓮 𝓕𝓸𝓾𝓻 𝓢𝓮𝓪𝓼𝓸𝓷𝓼 and THEN~𝓦𝓱𝓸𝓸𝓸𝓸𝓸𝓸𝓱! (and I KNEW it wasn’t the GLUE TOO!) 😉 ❤️🪲🎼 I KNEW I WANTED MORE! I G💿T M💿RE~never looked back….𝓘 𝔀𝓪𝓼 𝓗💿💿𝓚𝓔𝓓‼️

@randybackgammon890

13 күн бұрын

@@hulagirl.kailua I think you'll find millions who did

@IntoTheSky19

13 күн бұрын

Same here...

Anybody can have great management. Anybody can be just as prolific as the Beatles. The reason for the hysteria and the reason why they've enjoyed longevity is the high quality of their songs. Bing worried about Frank. Frank worried about Elvis. Elvis worried about The Beatles. The Beatles haven't worried about anyone in 60 years.

@richardturpin3665

19 күн бұрын

The reason for the hysteria is that they paid young females to act hysterically for them getting off the plane and no doubt done the same at gigs. It was manufactured by the machine. Beatles Mania was faked for tv. Plenty of these women have since told how they were paid to do this.

@jeanmyers1787

19 күн бұрын

Very well said!

@budmcnew7763

19 күн бұрын

​@@richardturpin3665interesting. I would really like to see actual proof of your claim. I'll wait

@bobtausworthe

14 күн бұрын

Well there was that time when Paul was worried about The Who's claim to have the hardest song and so he wrote Helter Skelter😂.

@garymclean765

10 күн бұрын

This is a great comment, says it all really and succinctly

Newborn babies, I had a customer whose baby would immediately stop crying and start laughing, smiling, giggling and moving to the music of the Beatles, the new mom was impressed and grateful that a ride around town listening to the Beatles would calm and change her baby's mood. Newborns don't know how to lie yet. So, this is 100% music and zero hype from advertisement.

Perhaps one important difference is that the Beatles didn't follow the mainstream, the mainstrain followed the Beatles who were anything but Middle of the Road.

Another thing the Beatles had that I haven't seen anyone address is seeming infallibility. A big part of why they were worshiped is the fact that everything they touched turned to gold. It made them seem virtually superhuman. They show up on television and it's the biggest thing that had ever happened on TV. They make a movie (A Hard Day's Night) and, miraculously, it's fantastic (to both fans and critics alike). Every record goes straight to number 1. They're the first one's to play within a stadium and they pack the place. They're awarded MBEs. They hold all top five spots on the music charts. They release Sgt. Pepper and it's almost immediately hailed as the greatest album of all time. The world went hysterical largely because they seemed as infallible as "gods." Also, I think you underestimate the sheer greatness and consistency of their artistry. I think what Drive My Car *might* have taught you is that even at their worst, they were still pretty darned good!

@francoforte5382

13 күн бұрын

Drive my car at their worst? Are you kidding??

@johnburns4017

9 күн бұрын

@@francoforte5382 Listening to _Drive My Car_ over squeaky supermarket speakers is very different to on a quality hi-fi. The guitar work then can be heard.

Even Ringo in Hamburg was attracted to them… He has said, “There was just something about that front line (John, Paul, and George) that warmed my heart.”

80% of barbershops closed within a year of the Beatles' arrival in the US. How's that for cultural impact?

@kasiup1

11 күн бұрын

Wow, thanks! Did not know that. So may ripple effects from the phenom 4!

@joecummings9662

9 күн бұрын

Where did you hear this 80% seems too high. There were still a lot of old men around getting the Shorty haircuts. Maybe 20%

@IntoTheSky19

9 күн бұрын

@@joecummings9662 Thanks for asking: "Do Bald Men Get Half-Price Haircuts?" by Vince Staten (2001), a history of American barbershops. (!) Here's another stat: in 1950 there were 287,655 barbershops and in 1999 55,893, a number that includes an upswing in barbershops in the 1980s. (I've written a book on the history of the Beatles and the Race to the moon called Into The Sky With Diamonds)

In the universe of music, there are The Beatles, and then... there's everyone else.

@alanpoland7688

15 күн бұрын

❤️❤️❤️❤️ Yeah Yeah Yeah 𝐇𝐄𝐋𝐋 𝐘𝐄𝐀𝐇‼️ You ROCK!

@normanpearson8753

14 күн бұрын

Others were brilliant,,,,,,,but not in the same street as The Beatles .

@losackmd

14 күн бұрын

very well said and so true...

It's not just the music, the look, the big personalities and the massive cultural impact. It all goes back to the compelling story of "the 4 boys from Liverpool" a story which captures the hearts and minds of young people even today. Go into the Beatles souvenir shop and see for yourself, the kids love them and they're not going anywhere.

@Zactivist

15 күн бұрын

It blows my mind really- my kids (9 and 13) have hardly a CLUE about most other acts from the past. But they know John Paul George and Ringo are the Beatles and they (it seems almost instinctive!) like the Beatles. No influence from me, I honestly don't know where it came from. I don't see ANY other act having that kind of staying power. The Beatles are simply timeless.

@Zactivist

15 күн бұрын

Just an example- when The Beatles released "Now and Then" my kids actually KNEW about it. They didn't even know what a freakin' SINGLE is- they have no concept of "records" and vaguely an idea even what an album is. (music to them just steams from out of the blue). But the Beatles releasing a single in 2023-they at least knew about it and knew it had some kind of cultural significance. That kind of power of a band's presence that crosses over generations and just keeps going blows my mind!

I disagree because I think you left out something-the Beatles sound, their voices and performance was uniquely brilliant

@alanpoland7688

9 күн бұрын

Their sound was their tool-their SONGS WERE THEIR MESSAGE‼️ Quite agree!

@johnburns4017

9 күн бұрын

In those day it was a front man, and his name, like Buddy Holly and Crickets, with a band behind. _The Beatles_ were different as they had three front men with all singing lead in some songs and the others adding harmonies. This confused the record men. They would not have it any other way.

@ashevillekathy

9 күн бұрын

@@alanpoland7688 I liked your agree! I can’t stop thinking about this- that no one who wasn’t alive when the Beatles started could imagine how totally different they were, definitely not an ordinary band. So much copying of them have made it hard to realize that they were really that high above the rest! It bothers me when excuses are made up to underestimate them. I’m a classically trained musician and I believe they rank with all the greats, maybe even outrank! It’s like being alive when Beethoven was alive.

@alanpoland7688

9 күн бұрын

@@ashevillekathy 𝐇𝐞𝐲 𝐊𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐲! I’ve just read what you’ve replied to me and firstly want to THANK-and AGREE WITH YOU TOO! You’ve certainly held them in 𝐡𝐢𝐠𝐡 𝐫𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐫𝐝 with 𝐁𝐞𝐞𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐂𝐨‼️ Being a trained classical musician, I take T your comments to heart! You most certainly understand this “musical phenomena” that “ᕼᗩᑭᑭᗴᑎᗴᗪ” here in ‘64-(‘63 for ME tho! I heard “𝒮𝒽𝑒 ℒ𝑜𝓋𝑒𝓈 𝒴𝑜𝓊” on some low-watt station around western Pennsylvania as I was down in our basement, building an AMT model kit and just had 𝒜 𝒲𝒾𝓃𝒹𝒾𝓌 𝓉𝑜 𝑜𝓊𝓇 𝒻𝓊𝓉𝓊𝓇𝑒🎵𝓌𝑜𝓇𝓁𝒹~Altho, not realizing it THEN! I was TEN‼️…..but 𝓘 𝓚𝓷𝓮𝔀💥𝓢𝓞𝓜𝓔𝓣𝓗𝓘𝓝𝓖 𝓦𝓐𝓢 𝑜𝓃 𝑜𝓊𝓇🎼🎼𝒽𝑜𝓇𝒾𝓏𝑜𝓃, as I KEPT PLAYING THAT STATION TO 𝒯ℛ𝒴 to hear MORE OF…….”𝓉𝒽𝒶𝓉 𝓈 𝑜 𝓊 𝓃 𝒹”) Fast forward~I’ve ALWAYS FELT that 𝒯𝒽𝑒 ℬ𝑒𝒶𝓉𝓁𝑒𝓈 WERE AND STILL ARE IN A CLASS OF THEIR OWN!!!! Even the Great MOTOWN MUSIC of that era~ BIG TIME CLASS OF ℐ𝒯‘𝒮 OWN….but The Beatles just broke me WIDE🎵OPEN, as I’d favored the ‘50s hits, The ‘60s pulled me to The Four Seasons……then that obscure record one October night in ‘63! 𝒪𝒽 𝒽𝑒𝓁𝓁 𝔂𝓮𝓪𝓱 𝔂𝓮𝓪𝓱 𝔂𝓮𝓪𝓱 𝓨𝓔𝓐𝓗! We should talk!! 😉 Be well, take care!!

There's something that's crucially important to the story of the Beatles and the sixties that often goes unnoticed - the rock industry that happened in their wake and the level of reverence and popularity that you regard their history with just barely existed prior to them. You know what did exist? World War 2. The period after WW2 was a period of an unprecedented Long Peace, and a furthering of an internationalisation, unity, mobility, trade, and crucially and economic and technological boost among the youth and the populace at large that made the idea of another imperial war more and more unfeasible by the day. Before that point, wars were a lot more common, and culture as a whole were a lot more inaccessible and lower in a hierarchy of needs for average people than basic security like food and shelter - if you didn't get drafted. Teenagers all over the world saw something really special when Elvis took the airwaves, and even moreso the Beatles: They looked androgynous, and they represented something close to a next evolutionary step of humanity. What they didn't look like was like the grizzled buzz-cut veterans of yore who would dread going to fight in the trenches again. Sadly hopes like that would be dashed by the coming of the Vietnam War in '65 and the drafts in America, but that's also precisely why the youth also fought so hard against it: They wanted to keep the newfound beauty they discovered, and the Beatles were in every meaning the centerpiece of it. I will also agree that Brian was a really shrewd and talented businessman. He knew the game. But he also had a belief in the boys, and as someone who's had a large share of persecution and who was also fearfully a gay man, I think it really speaks something if Brian saw something immense and irreplacable in them. I wouldn't compare the Beatles to Jackson or Swift as you've put, because the state of the world they existed in is so much different than the world the Beatles appeared in. The world was still recovering from centuries of warfare, oppression and authoritarian ideologies, and they wanted to break free from it. Instead, the next big musician I would compare the Beatles to would be Ludwig van Beethoven. Beethoven also did something unprecedented for his time: He was a romanticist - it was the romantic period. His composed not with genius or math, but with feelings, fiery, brooding, doing so in a world that many romantics felt had forgotten all about. The world before romanticism was a world without feelings and the inner world. Beethoven represented that thing that the world was lacking. So did the Beatles.

@talbino7821

14 күн бұрын

This is a beautiful explanation. Totally agree with you on that post war generation trying to see something more in the world than their parents or grandparents had. Another 19th century figure I always compare the Beatles to is Charles Dickens, who came from a extremely poor and lowly background to achieve phenomenal national and international fame for his novels. They sneered at upper class and middle values, sympathised with the poor, tried to address complicated issues of the day - and in a few cases, actually created changes too.

@MelanieAF

13 күн бұрын

They were also fortunate in coming of age just when national military service in England was abolished. Elvis wasn’t so lucky.

The only issue about Brian and Ed Sullivan you left out was a key event that led to Brian having access to Sullivan. In 1963, Ed was at Heathrow Airport when the Beatles arrived at the airport with hundreds of screaming fans greeting them. Sullivan was always on the look out for the next Elvis and so he asked about who these Beatles were. Without that chance event, I doubt Sullivan would have paid Brian much heed. That and the sales in Europe set them up. In the US, Capital records did not want to promote the band as the head guy didn’t like them. What happened was a girl in Baltimore who had gotten their records from a friend from England kept calling her local radio station till they played it. After that, the fans demanded it to the point that Capital had to take notice. A few other markets found the same impact. This led to giving the Beatles enough leverage to get Capital promotion and the rest is history. I think Brian was great but he fell into success because the Beatles music, like it did in Liverpool and Hamburg, grabbed young people. And while they played Sullivan it was their performance and songs that got so many kids to love them. And I want to Hold Your Hand was number 1 about 10 days before the first Sullivan show. A lot fell into place but it was the Beatles songs and innate charisma followed by their constant artistic changes and quality that made them the greatest.

there the greatest because they not only wrote brilliant songs, but at the peak of there fame experimented with new sounds and new ways or recording (still used today) and stopped touring and still they pushed there fame to new heights after all those risks!

Noone has ever had such a hit rate with melodies. Even the worst Beatles songs are catchier than most bands' Greatest Hits.

@GT380man

20 күн бұрын

It’s between implausible and impossible,isn’t it? Those in denial, which is most people, get quite vicious and personal when raising questions like this. I understand why that is, and they do it in multiple domains without realising what they’re doing. It’s an interesting study in human psychology to observe it happening.

@NeoTrinity1111

19 күн бұрын

In one band, yes. But take the top four songwriters from Tamla Motown at the same time, and there is no shortage of million selling songs from artists that also endure. The Beatles would be among the first to acknowledge this.

@BeatlesCentricUniverse

19 күн бұрын

​@@NeoTrinity1111Yeah, no comparison in quantity or quality can be made. Lennon and McCartney were more prolific and wrote way better songs than literally everyone in the 60s.

@lukenardoni2454

19 күн бұрын

​@@BeatlesCentricUniverseBob Dylan might have something to say about that.

@paulw6057

17 күн бұрын

Not the absolute worst. 'Yer Blues' still sucks, (imo) Beatles or no Beatles.

I've been a major fan for many, many years, bought everything, listened to everything, analyzed everything to the point of all consuming obsession and still don't really know!!🤷. Of course it's the fantastic music, that particular sound, the progression, style, charisma etc etc etc, but there was, and still is,....... 'something' more . Indefinable, mystical, perhaps even religious?. There's some merit in the contents of this fellas analysis, but it only scratches the surface really!. It's strange to say , but I can only say this........ What the Beatles did and still do to me, and by now, billions of others, had never, ever happened before they came along and it will never, ever happen again , perhaps because The Beatles are still happening!!.

@gregsmith7949

16 күн бұрын

It's safe to say that the Beatles are eternal.

@nthdegree1269

10 күн бұрын

Everything aligned for them... You go through the history very carefully there's so many coincidence and so many things that just lined up. People back then were excited also because they were witnessing something that they innately intuitively knew would last beyond a hundred years. Giiven the whirlwind of their success and everything that was happening I still don't even think they reached their peak

@501sqn3

10 күн бұрын

@@nthdegree1269 ....."Syncronicity" ?? Possibly??. Sadly we shall never know what they may have gone on to do together. Still, their legacy is overwhelming, all those songs, the shows, the footage , the memories!

To have experienced and lived through the change of music from Chuck Berry, Elvis etc, through to the Beatles has been a pleasure. To think that 60 years on from 1964 the Beatles are the yardstick for other musicians to measure their talents. In 100 years the Beatles will still be a talking point and worth a listen. Beatles music will be recorded by future musicians who will no doubt put their own style to the sound. We have now come to the cycle of the earth that there will never be another Beatles and music will not change...Just a bunch of singer/song writers who will have their time in the sun but will fade away quicker than my curtains.

I was 12 when the Beatles were on Ed Sullivan, 16 when Sgt Pepper was released. I would play that album in the family room. My mother would chime in from the kitchen, "Who is that?" "I love those songs" She had no idea it was the Beatles. Last year I was standing with some friends. Much younger than me and they had a 15-year-old daughter. She had never heard of the Beatles. I played some of their older stuff that she liked, but when she heard Abbey Road she was hooked. "Come Together" was always playing when she was around. She had no idea how popular they had been. She just loved their music. The Beatles are the biggest because they are the best. It's really that simple. Sure when they were mop-tops all cute and all, everyone loved them. But then John made a crack about Jesus, they admitted to taking drugs, Yoko Ono added some weirdness, but still, they remained number one. They were smart, funny, photogenic, charismatic and immensely talented. With George Martin helping to realize their musical dreams, the Beatles created a catalog that will undoubtedly endure for as long as humans listen to music. When I talk or write about the musicians, singers and groups who emerged in the 60s, I don't include the Beatles. They were and remain in a class of their own.

@louise_rose

16 күн бұрын

The Beatles were the archetypal "generation band" of the sixties, but they also had an appeal across generations, back then and later. I think that's almost impossible to match, especially today.. The "band of brothers" factor, too, had a huge pull to the baby-boomers generation. Ringo said in a later interview that when he joined the band, it was like suddenly having found three cool brothers to hang out with, and this vibe of "the cool elder brothers' gang, discovering the wrord" was something they projected for their fan community too. They must have been aware of it, and it was eminently an attitude that fit in with the sixties.

@johnburns4017

9 күн бұрын

None of the _The Beatles_ were pretty boys, so physical looks was not a part of it. Their hair was dyed mid/dark brown in the mop top days. John's hair was more of an auburn red.

@kathykaye272

Күн бұрын

My mom loved Let it be and Eleanor Rigby and more and she was not a youngster

In 1966 the Rutles faced the biggest threat to their careers. Nasty in a widely quoted interview had apparently claimed that the Rutles were bigger than God, and was reported to have gone on to say that God had never had a hit record. The story spread like wildfire in America. Many fans burnt their albums, many more burnt their fingers attempting to burn their albums. Album sales sky-rocketed. People were buying them just to burn them. But in fact it was all a ghastly mistake. Nasty, talking to a slightly deaf journalist, had claimed only that the Rutles were bigger than Rod. Rod Stewart would not be big for another eight years, and certainly at this stage hadn’t had a hit. At a press conference, Nasty apologized to God, Rod and the press, and the tour went ahead as planned. It would be the Rutles’ last.

@Innerspace100

17 күн бұрын

And then, they discovered tea...

@gregsmith7949

16 күн бұрын

​@@Innerspace100The Rutles "Tea phase" is my favorite. After all, we got Sgt. Rutters out of their tea use.

@Innerspace100

16 күн бұрын

@@gregsmith7949 Yes, tea is a powerful brew...

@lamper2

15 күн бұрын

I bet your post will send young rock fans scurrying to research this "band" much like the "Masked Mauraders LP did among lower IQ rock fans of that era.

@gribwitch

13 күн бұрын

The Rutles were definitely bigger than the Beatles. The Beatles would be unknown if the Rutles hadn't influenced them so much. ( And if anyone disagrees with me, I'll send the Piranha brothers around to your house. EVERYONE feared the Piranha brothers. ) !

It's like when you see someone and, without any context, you don't think they're that attractive. Then, perhaps you find something out about them or observe them in a different setting where perhaps people are giving them lots of positive attention, or they're receiving praise and adulation, and suddenly you begin to be attracted to them, seeing them as more physically beautiful, even saying "They are actually quite good-looking" when what is really meant is "I'm more attracted to them (because I've seen that other people are)". Pre-selection I believe is the term. The more popular you seem, the more popular you become.

@hulagirl.kailua

16 күн бұрын

Actually not true....from that generation and when "I want to hold your hand" came out we were STUNNED. We had never seen them before only heard their music. We wouldn't actually see them (with the exception of 'Meet the Beatles' album which I bought in November of 1963) until the Ed Sullivan Show in Feb of 1964. The archived video footage you see is our reaction to seeing them for the first time after being totally blown away by the new sound of their music. We actually asked our choir teacher in December of 1963 to analyze their album with us. HE was also in shock...thought it was a bit simplistic, but shocked just the same as to how different the sound was.

Positive, relatable, melodic and mainstream. Huge mountain to climb.

You cannot have a debate about the success of The Beatles without out taking into consideration the politics of the music industry in the late 1950’s early 60’s. It was like prohibition. The youth wanted Jack Daniel’s, the groups were only allowed to give them milk. The Beatles gave its audience what it wanted. Not what the men in grey suits told them would be appropriate.

I don't think anyone who was not there at the time can ever know how the Beatles changed everything. I was a schoolboy when I heard "Please Please Me" for the first time. Nothing like it had ever been heard before. It was a moment in history. Britain was emerging from the greyness of the class-ridden 50's. They epitomised everything about that whole social revolution.

,You need to have lived through that era to understand. You may compare their music to all the genres that came after them. Of course, you can't expect them to have anticipated metal, punk, prog rock or grunge. If you compare them to what came before, you'll see the impact they had. They single handedly rewrote the whole script in popular music, as well as pioneered new sounds between 1964 and 1970. Eventually, every other band or artist was copying them whenever they came out with a new album and a new sound. It was also the upbeat optimism of their sound, with incredibly well crafted songs. Their cheeky humor was also a big draw. There was also a cultural revolution happening at the time that they fed into. They had many of these things together in one package.

When you consider that the world's population back in the days of the Beatles was around 3.3 billion (todays is over 8 billion) , and you couldn't just 'download' songs/albums with a thumb press and physically had to get to a music shop and purchase it, The Beatles were even bigger than you think and owned a far larger share of the world audience in their hands than anybody else since. The only reason many album sales from the likes of Swift, Sheeran, Beyonce, etc have stood up to the Beatles sales is because they're current artists playing to a current audience who are up on the whole downloading game. To put it possibly a little insensitively, many 1960s Beatles fanatics are either old or dead. And even given that, they still hold a massive fan base 60 years after they emerged to the world. Giving the attention span of kids these days, I'll be surprised if 'Taylor Swift' is even a thing 20 years from now. I mean, whose still buying Britney Spears records today ?

@trickygoose2

17 күн бұрын

In the Beatles' prime, I suspect the only way many households could access music at all was via the radio.

Brilliantly creative analysis. As to why the adulation disappeared when the Beatles broke up, you have given us the reason: The public was ANGRY about the breakup, and the "magical musical lens" was inverted.

It's very briefly touched on, but I think one of the key appeals of the Beatles was their charm and wit. Especially in the States at that time, where such irreverence was seen as disrespectful rather than just loveably cheeky. The fact that a Beatles cartoon was quickly made to capitalise on this irreverence tells it's own story, I think. Everything else you've said I agree with, particularly the Brian stuff. Funnily enough, when I first heard Paperback Writer I thought it sounded like The Monkees; a sped-up version of Last Train to Clarksville or something.

For me it’s the songwriting and the sheer volume of quality. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a huge Beatles fan, but they recorded some very average gimmicky songs. The fact they had to earn their corn, nothing much was contrived, their Britishness, their evolution. They had it all.

@prschuster

20 күн бұрын

Also, you can't fully appreciate their influence if you didn't come of age during that time. If you grew up later, hearing grunge, punk, metal and more recent genres, you can't appreciate the effect they had in the 60s, before all these other post Beatles bands came on the scene. The Beatles were such a departure from what came before, that it was like a tidal wave.

@TheDandob1982

19 күн бұрын

@@prschuster not sure that’s true, otherwise there’d be no such thing as a historian.

@paulw6057

17 күн бұрын

I agree, it's the prolific nature of so many quality songs and albums coming out in a very short space of time... and the fact that the songs were put together so much better than almost everything else. However, I don't think Lennon or McCartney were necessarily any better as individual musicians or songwriters to the likes of Ray Davies or Brian Wilson, they just had better help. I like the iconography, etc, around the band but that comes after the appreciation of the music.

@prschuster

17 күн бұрын

@@paulw6057 It is very subjective to rate songwriters like this. A lot of it is up to personal preference. It is hard to beat two great songwriters collaborating, along with George Martin as a recording engineer. Then there's a third songwriter - George Harrison. Any one of them alone wouldn't do as well.

Two competing song writers, who respected each other’s abilities and their value to the group , but the biggest thing that made the difference, was George Martin.

@LSUOdyssey

20 күн бұрын

Everything aligned

@pierremchughes9917

20 күн бұрын

They didn't write most of it...wake up

@Reno_Slim

20 күн бұрын

​@@pierremchughes9917 If not then who did? Post your evidence to back your claim.

@LSUOdyssey

20 күн бұрын

@@pierremchughes9917 huh?

@GT380man

20 күн бұрын

@@pierremchughes9917I agree. Once you know, you know. It’s not something that can be understood in five minutes. It’s obviously a covert operation. The proofs are ample and available to anyone who has the courage to look. Most not only won’t look, because they’re really frightened of what they might find, and smart enough to realise prospectively what such insight will mean for the rest of the environment in which they live.

And to your point: When McCartney released "Maybe I'm Amazed" on his first solo album, it went nowhere; it was not even released as a single. Everyone hated McCartney (falsely) for having broken up the Beatles. Fast forward 6 years, the public had warmed up to him again, turning the lens back in his favor. He played the same song, the same way on his Wings Over America tour - and it was a hit, still considered by many to be his best post-Beatle song. Same song, different lens.

@Kieop

19 күн бұрын

Great example.

@paulw6057

17 күн бұрын

People still misjudge his 'Granny Music' and give Lennon's sometimes dreary roots tendencies a free pass.

@Neil-Aspinall

16 күн бұрын

Yes if Maybe I'm Amazed had of been released as a Beatle's song (for all intents and purposes it was really?) It would have been massive.

@gribwitch

13 күн бұрын

Paul didn't break up the Beatles. A number of factors did. He kept the band together for longer than would otherwise have happened. It was his drive, enthusiasm and desire to leave a memorable legacy for future generations to enjoy that held the band together when John and George said they'd had enough. It was Paul that rang George Martin, their producer, and asked him if he would overlook the band's internal bickering and produce one last album with which to go out on. Martin was reticent at first, but Paul persuaded him and the result was "Abbey Road" - arguably their best album. Without Paul's efforts we wouldn't have had "Abbey Road" or the singles from 1969. Nor possibly would we have had the "Let It Be" album and their legendary rooftop concert.

@mightysmith1

13 күн бұрын

The original version of Maybe I'm Amazed was never released as a single. Songs seldom chart when they do not get released as singles. Both McCartney and Get Back albums, released approximately a month apart, hit #1 on the US Album charts. McCartney I is certified as a double Platinum - in terms of sales. This performance was all despite Jann Wenner (co-founder of Rolling Stone) forcing Langdon Winner to rewrite his favorable album review. Plus, half the songs on the album are instrumentals, which leads one to wonder if it was really meant to be commercial on the same level as a Beatles album - or if it was a declaration of McCartney releasing something that was meant to say he was an artist in his own right, outside of being a Beatle...

Unfortunately, the record labels have tried their hardest to retire rock and promote their AI autotuned music. If a Band is ever going to be bigger than the Beatles, the record companies need to get behind rock artists again. Lets hope they do.

@tt-du6vc

19 күн бұрын

That rock thing is over for the companies.

It's like NG said once, 'when does anyone get into the Beatles? They're just there' their influence is beyond far reaching and they were the 1st in a lot of things musically.

@bobtaylor170

17 күн бұрын

I don't care who NG is, but you should know that acronyms drive people crazy. We don't all share your knowledge or enthusiasms.

@bderrick4944

13 күн бұрын

@@bobtaylor170Noel Gallagher

@bobtaylor170

13 күн бұрын

@@bderrick4944 ah, thank you.

I think this video is very interesting, but it misses one thing that only The Beatles had: consistency; just seven years releasing one album after another, each one more innovative than the last. Nowadays that is impossible for any musician, what's more, they don't even try or care, music is no longer sold like that. And ... how many 'innovation' is left in terms of music? I don't know. I also don't agree on two points: Music changed in the 70's and 80's, so none of them, who continued making rock/pop (except for McCartney, who came up with some electronic pieces ) could have the impact they had as a band. I find the comparison unfair. And the second point confirms what I say: McCartney did have a successful solo career, with many excellent songs that are in fact much better than some of the ones he composed for The Beatles. I think a myth was created around them while they were together, it's true, but once you knew their songs, they never let you down, and the new material was even better. What band or soloist could offer that? None. Every band has albums and weak songs. Again: consistency.

@MyNameIsNeutron

16 күн бұрын

King Gizzard. That's all I'll say.

One of the best channels on KZread covering the best band in the world? Perfect! Can't wait to watch this one

Very interesting take this. Well thought out. I think a lot of things like enless number 1s and the like was a result of the mania. This is the case for most bands though. Once established, the name alone can influence people's opinions. The mania had nothing to do with the music. It was just pure chaos that existed around them. Its Very odd looking back at it nowadays. What makes them so revered is the sheer amount of amazing songs and the fact that they were light years ahead of their peers in songwriting and production. From about 65 onwards the output was actually bonkers. Some filler on there too of course but they were scary good at their peak.

The Beatles crossed generations. My siblings, mother, father, and grandparents, all sang along while watching them on The Ed Sullivan Show.

I was listening to the 2023 blue album in the car the other day, and had forgotten that 'Now and Then' was even on the CD. I listened to it 3 or 4 times! I like it more now than when it came out. Its really a good song. I hope the vocals on 'Free As a Bird' and 'Real Love' are done the same way using the demixing technology to extract John's voice from the tape, like 'Now and Then' was. It will really improve those songs.

@johnburns4017

9 күн бұрын

_Real Love_ was not done with AI technology. They should go back and remix the song using the latest technology as it will enhance the song for sure.

@michaelharrington75

9 күн бұрын

@@johnburns4017 That's exactly what I said. "I hope the vocals on 'Free As A Bird' and 'Real Love' are done the same way using the demixing technology to extract John's voice from the tape, like 'Now and Then' was."

There are so many reasons why the Beatles are No. 1: - their explosion into a time and a world without fixed musical directions - their Songwriting abilities: According to Rolling Stone Magazine list number 2 (Paul), 3 (John) and 65 (George) of the best songwriters ever - their musical creativity: 12 Studio-Albums plus the Double-EP MAgicl Mystery Tour plus several special recordings plus som Live-Recordings, plus... in eight years... plus the songs they wrote for other musicians and bands... - their singing abilities: Although they couldn't hear themselves on stage due to the screaming of the fans - the monitoring was invented especially for their second US tour - I don't know of any live recording of false singing - their status as the role model for all the boy bands to come: four different characters, four young men with different abilities, - their musical progression inbetween the eight years. The way from "Love me do" (the album) to "Let it be" (the album) - their status as cultual trendsetters: Hippie culture withou the Beatles? Unimaginable! - their status as political trendsetters: John's fight for peace, Paul's fight for the protection of animals, Georges fight for social justice, - they were the ones who gained puplic acceptance in all social classes for rock and pop - they were the first to use eight-track recording - they crashed the doors and walls and made the British Invasion of the US possible - they were the first to use eastern elements like the sitar in pop and rock - an even marginally correct number of cover versions of their songs seems to be impossible And this is just only a part of what the Fab Four have done for rock and pop. And I do not even mention the many records they have set until today. Even today - 54 years after the official dissolution of the band - new releases, newly remastered recordings, documentaries and fictional stories by and about the Beatles inspire millions of audiences.

The Beatles songs are phenomenal.

Culture- The first widespread exposure to androgyny to young men in the west. Drugs- The widespread exposure to POT and LSD to millions of young people throughout the world via their songs and lifestyle cannot be overstated . The association with commune lifestyle implicit in their group lifestyle. Exposure to the music of Black American songwriters on a large scale.Widespread exposure to World Music.The almost magical appearance of being ahead of trends. Music - Two of the finest SINGERS in Pop/Rock singing dozens of meaningful songs that were written, performed and sung by them. Ian MacDonald’s book- Revolution in the Head - is a must read for anyone who is serious about the Influence of The Beatles on our current culture- the good and the bad. Apple and Steve Jobs - see The Beatles. Thank you James this was outstanding.

You give very important insight. I mostly agree! It was a perfect storm. I was there in a sense...I'm 75 and remember coming out of the early 60s.. this sound was something new. I went to the Montreal concert Sept 8 64 and there was something going on, very special.On a personal note I didn't love all their music like" Chains"...I also didn't care about "can't buy me love " but soon after "i'll be back" was on the radio It was so beautiful & different I was Hooked ,I loved your Apple,Steve Jobs comparison ..I didn't realize it until you said it.

I'm old enough to remember the world before The Beatles. The teenage music scene was dominated by Elvis. Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Sam Cooke and 'doo wop' groups from across the pond were exciting to listen to but in the UK we only had Family Favourites and Children's Favourites on BBC radio and these played mostly novelty songs and ballads that didn't really interest us. We were waiting for The Beatles to happen.. but we didn't know it. Then suddenly, there they were and the world immediately changed from black & white to colour. The Beatles career went in phases which you can read about in the many good books that have been written about them and are still being written. When they stopped touring and became a studio band, the music critics, fans and pretty well everyone else was constantly wondering "What will they do next?" as they took song writing and recording to another level.. and another ..and another. They never wanted to repeat a successful formula, but always moved on and broke new ground. They were astonishingly productive, writing and recording well over 200 songs in just seven years, almost all of which are now considered classics. When I hear young people today, who weren't even born until 20 years after The Beatles broke up, discussing the Get Back movie or Giles Martin's remixed Beatles albums, I don't pretend to understand why they take an interest - but it makes me very happy. That's why The Beatles are so great. They're inexhaustible.

The video claims it was beatlemania that made them the biggest band. It is actually the quality of their songs and how they were able to keep reinventing themselves.

@richardturpin3665

19 күн бұрын

It was the marketing

@dirgsuite5546

18 күн бұрын

@@richardturpin3665 Sure, that was a big part. But you can market all that you want, if the songs, personalities, musical evolution are not there, it won't do much.

@richardturpin3665

18 күн бұрын

@dirgsuite5546 really? Have you heard the music today. Take ice spice, for example. The industry knows that playing music repetitively on the radio people will grow to like said music. It's a brainwashing technique. Beatles was the default option in their day. I listen to loads of old music often older than the beatles. Rubber soul is peak beatles. And it ain't that special. I wouldn't miss any beatles music band or solo.

@iriemon1796

17 күн бұрын

@@richardturpin3665 Thanks for sharing your opinion. And because in *your* opinion the Beatles "ain't that special" it must just be the marketing that made the Beatles so phenomenally popular and influential? It must satisfying to think your own subjective opinion can be fact determinative for the rest of the world.

@richardturpin3665

17 күн бұрын

@iriemon1796 it's more to do with statistics and probability than opinion. Far fewer options, secret hand shakes behind the scenes, and faking beatle Mania. all had massive factors. It's not what you know it's who you know, and to add, they were pushed by mi5 to make society more hedonistic just like nwa was pushed to fill prisons. It's called social engineering.

Whereas many other 60s bands primarily took their influence from rock n roll and blues in an attempt to appear “tough”, the Beatles drew musical influences from other diverse genres like music hall, Motown girl groups, stage musicals, baroque and other styles which many people would consider “unmanly”. You don’t compose a song like Eleanor Rigby by listening to Gene Vincent constantly.

This is definitely a thought provoking video although I think one point was missed. In the beginning, the Beatles sound and harmonies was completely different from other pop music at that time. I remember my first hearing the Beatles on the radio in a small town is western Canada. Pop music was Elvis or simple 4 chord songs. My older sister mentioned to me that a popular group from England would be on our only radio station (CBC) that evening. When the Beatles songs finally came on, it was like a musical explosion to me...great melodies and beat, beautiful harmonies,....it all came together into something different from what I'd ever heard before. I was hooked. I knew nothing of the hype.. nobody had a TV.and we only one national radio station....I only heard the music. I, like many other young guys, had to buy a guitar. I wanted to be in a band. In our little town, many small groups were formed, mostly playing covers of Beatle songs. I agree with your discussion how they became as big as they were, but the music was the hook. Today's music of auto-tune, electronic sounds, all performed to a clip track just doesn't have the excitement created by talented musicians and vocalists creating music.

I think that one reason why you see a lot of soundtracks on the list of best-selling albums is that the movie gives them automatic context. Think about the “Star Wars” theme. I bet you’ve been in a situation where you heard it out of the blue and suddenly, you were in space in an X-Wing or something. The context is just automatically there. Same with “Thriller.” I bet when you hear the title song, or “Beat It,” your mind flashes to the music videos. Context is everything.

The Beatles reached the hysteria they did due to a very unique circumstance I offer per below. 1) The teenage demographic was the largest we had ever known since the advent of efficient record recording and distribution system. Hence the audience was available and the industry had the means. 2) Music was available via AM Radio which was nowhere as fractured as today where everyone has a specific FM genre of music they desire and primarily listen to. Top 40 was it and it alone. Perhaps a larger city would have maybe 2 or 3 listened to AM platforms. 3) Yes the Beatles were very talented people, but the Record Industry saw $$$$ and pumped the well as long and hard as humanly possible. 4) One only needs to look at Elvis to understand the grow of the focused campaign the entertainment industry had available. 5) I don’t mean to underrate the talent or cultural impact of The Beatles, but they hit the sweet spot and they had the talent and unique personalities to match the moment these circumstances presented. I could go on and on but these are (some) of the reasons I have the opinion I do.

This is a very good video essay. Well done.

Interesting thoughts and a lot about Brian Epstein that I didn't know! In my opinion, everything came together with the Beatles: The history of the Beatles, the charisma, their songs, the legends, the versatility, but also the era of the 60s, which was a great time of transformation. But I don't know whether the Beatles were rather average at the beginning, as G. Martin said and also the person responsible at Decca for the sessions. There are also statements that the Beatles stood out from the other bands in the early days in Hamburg and Brian Epstein was also fascinated by them and didn't just do it for the chance to earn money, or am I wrong? PS: I can remember being fascinated by Beatles songs as a child in the 80s - without knowing the band behind them. And I also remember being totally fascinated the first time I saw her in a movie, it was kind of magical. So it's a bit different from your story with "Drive My Car". I think there are definitely several points of view.

@GT380man

20 күн бұрын

I don’t know if you’re aware of this, but despite long periods in Hamburg, they didn’t have a single finished song to play at their audition with George Martin. He turned them down flat. They had nothing but cheeky charisma. They hadn’t any writing or arranging ability. None were particularly capable musicians, having had no formal training as younger people. It’s no longer faintly a surprise to me to hear, for example, from the most recorded drummer in the world, Bernard Purdie, repeatedly say “There were four drummers on Beatles albums. None of them was Ringo”. He drummed on a dozen or twenty early songs, I can’t recall the number. Those protecting the myth of the Beatles shout Purdie down. But he’s absolutely no incentive to lie. He’s very wealthy and the most successful session drummer in music history. So I believe him. It fits the other evidence we are shown by other researchers, notably Mike Williams. Mike only tripped over the deceit while watching a Beatles documentary. He’s a minor songwriter and recording artist and understands the musical & technical aspects of the business. The more he delved into the authorised history, the more convinced he became that it wasn’t plausible, eventually wasn’t possible. And once you expose a massive lie about one album (Rubber Soul), why in the world would you believe the official history of anything else about the band?

@tt-du6vc

19 күн бұрын

That got me interested in William’s channel. He even goes deeper searching “McCartney”’s ancestry saying things like he is connected with Crowley and that he is a kind of antichrist, that Paul’s death had to happen and he is the one and all that. Fucked up but maybe WHO KNOWS???

@Kieop

19 күн бұрын

In his interviews, George Martin was constantly putting them down as songwriters in the early days, which always puzzled me. So when Mark Lewisohn's book Tune In came out and claimed that GM was forced to record them because the EMI in house publishers Ardmore and Beechwood wanted the Lennon-McCartney publishing rights and couldn't get them without recording them (one of Brian's conditions), it made perfect sense to me. Finally. Something that had been bugging me for years finally made sense. That's why their first 6 sides were original numbers rather than covers. GM only intended to fulfill the contract, probably without even releasing them. But through the course of recording these songs, he began to see their potential and decided to screw over A&B by getting Dick James to take over their publishing. Since their songwriting has stood the test of time, even without the hype lens IMO, and since surely A&B must've heard something in it, in order to accept such a condition from Brian so as to get their hands on it, I must conclude that George Martin was just wrong. Though he'd never admit it. Nor all the people who believe that George Martin WAS the Beatles. Listening to his other artists or his own music should dispel that notion though. He was a great producer who translated what his artists wanted/needed very well. But he wasn't the genius behind The Beatles.

Everything you say. But I'd add that the myth making can be backed up by substance. Going over the 100 mark with great songs everyone remembers. No one else has done that. They have scores of album tracks only that are more legendary than most No1 singles by everyone else.

Hi James. I started my own KZread channel, I’ve enjoyed your videos and liked the one about how to start a channel. Cheers mate, enjoying your content!

Certain things can only happen once.

that´s explain why john lennon claimed to hate or not like many of his extraordinary songs with the beatles (a day in the life, and your bird can sing) , because he was maybe analizing the songs objectively, with no lens of their fans, and he and george were particulary fed up of the massive hysteria of the beatlemania.

@jugibur2117

18 күн бұрын

John Lennon said a lot of things against almost all Beatles songs, sometimes he even contradicted himself. And there are also songs that are rather unpopular among Beatles fans, so why don't we look at them through that lens? So I do think that the quality is assessed quite objectively by the most of us

Great video, as always

I didn't have the reaction you describe at all. I was too young to be aware of Beatlemania when I heard Beatles songs on the radio, but I loved them, and some of the first records I bought were Beatles records, in 1966, when I was four years old. I liked the Monkees too, but I collected Beatles records. However, it was still only their music that interested me, I preferred early Beatles records through Rubber Soul, but I also enjoyed hearing things like Penny Lane and Sgt. Pepper that often played on the radio in that era. I must have listened to all the early Beatles records hundreds of times by the time I went to college in 1980, but I knew nothing about their story, and I still didn't know which Beatle was which. My focus was entirely on the music and not the culture, or who played the music. I got in an argument with a friend about it grade school, when I said I liked the Monkees, and he called them "fakey", claiming they didn't play their own instruments. I couldn't imagine why that made a difference. What a stupid objection! Because all you hear is the sound, and you either like it or you don't. I was a little amazed to learn that at such a young age, he was captured by the myth, the image, the story, or whatever. I only cared about the sound. In the case of The Beatles, it might have been an astrological destiny, because I was conceived in December of 1961, when they signed their contract with Brian Epstein, and I was born in September, 1962, when they were recording their first hit. It isn't clear why they needed to gestate for nine months, but I was born into a Masonic tradition, and people say The Beatles were using Masonic occult symbolism. I just loved the sound.

@timothykuring3016

18 күн бұрын

I don't however disagree that the myth was a big part of their general popularity and Beatlemania, but I think a lot of that was contrived by the Tavistock publicity machine, and it was specifically for a time and a place, which was probably highly occult as well.

@MrmelodyUs

17 күн бұрын

@@timothykuring3016 Proof?

Great James, you clearly explained the phenomenon of The Beatles!! There was and is nothing like The Beatles ever! The Beatles were the greatest band in the entire world! 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

Born in 1954, I was caught up in Beatlemania and followed their careers both as a band and then as individuals. For half a century I rated them as the best band in the world without question. In latter years, however, I began delving deeper into ABBA's music catalogue - having only been aware of their substantial number of hits during the 70's. What I discovered changed my opinion. As this guy suggests, musical preferences are subjective - but these days I much prefer listening to ABBA albums than the Beatles offerings. As an Aussie I saw ABBA mania first hand and though I was not crazy over them at that point, it certainly appeared that the rest of the country was. Bands are a product of their time and the importance of The Beatles can never be overstated. Indeed I have heard Benny & Bjorn refer to them as the musical gods. But at the end of the day I judge all music based on how pleasant it is to the ear, the intelligence of lyrics and the emotions that it stirs. ABBA win all those aspects from my perspective.

No one yet has successfully explained the effect of the Beatles/Beatlemania.

James luv … your best ever video. As an educator myself, I see here a video dissertation worthy of an A+. But one flaw … Ed Sullivan Show was not a chat show, so … I’ll give it an A

@joefunsmith

12 күн бұрын

But it was a really big shooo.

In 1975 I heard a few songs on radio during a Beatles A to Z weekend. I liked Fool on The Hill and Penny Lane so I tracked down the album Magical History Tour and fell in love with every song. A month later I’m having breakfast in the kitchen at 7am while on a Cape Cod vacation. A song came on radio that was so beautiful…when it ended the DJ said “Yesterday Beatles gold 1965”

You are so right about the publicity angle here. It really is a gigantic deal. It played apart almost more important than the music itself this was a great video sir.

One of your best James 👊 brilliant!

I wasn't alive for any of it, so why do I like them so much? How is it that younger generations, who hear it for the first time not knowing or caring who the Beatles are, become fans? With everything, if it doesn't hold up you won't have fans of something that was before their time. You want to know how I got into the Beatles? We were supposed to be in groups picking out our essay assignment in the library, but I was goofing off. The teacher came to the table and asked what we chose. The guy next to me said "John Lennon." She asked me what I chose, and I looked at his book that said: "the Beatles." So I said "the Beatles." I was a few words short of finishing this essay, so I wanted to pad it out with some song names (pulling one of those "they had many great hits including:..." I'm a genius). I looked through my parents CDs, and I picked up the white album, because it looked like a double album so it would have more names of songs. As I was finishing I decided to put it on... and I didn't go to sleep. I listened to the ENTIRE double album and then listened to it again. It completely changed my world... and there was no hype machine, no screaming fans, no religious fervor, no bandwagon effect, no scheming British businessmen. Not to understate his talents, but he had a good product to sell. Period. Let's be honest though... don't you think the hype machine is far more evolved today? EVERYTHING is far more tightly controlled, to the point where boy bands were literally engineered and pushed to the top as an example of trying to recreate beatlemania, and they pull talent that has better voices and are attractive to specifically target certain demographics. Many artists don't even write their own songs; they have professional songwriters. These people have millions of dollars to throw around and the results are terrible. If anyone can do it, they would.

This video is beyond great! You are so interesting to listen to my "admiration " for the Beatles is better understood now. A well crafted expose of why the Beatles were so great. I cant wait to hear you again❤

You are right about this to some extent, I mean it's true for many, but some of my favourite music and bands I discovered organically and loved. With no filter at first. From hearing something in a record store or just tuning into something at the right moment on the radio, hearing a tune playing in the background. Someone else playing something etc etc. Just the music own it's own and having no idea about who it was or their image or anything. I found out who they were and went and purchased singles and albums based on this alone. A lot of these artists became very big and popular. Which was only propelled further by the type of thing you are talking about. Once it's popular it becomes more popular. Yet for me, the music has to be there. It's the main thing.

@georgejansen1772

19 күн бұрын

I always loved the Beatles though as well, since I was child. In this instance the image was part of it perhaps to an extent, as that already existed. But still I loved the music. So many catchy tunes. This is another thing about bands for me. Consistency. When they have so many great tunes.

What you on about. Tony Clifton was way bigger than The Beatles.

Michael Jackson was and Taylor Swift is a major Beatles fan and part of the craft momentum, as many of the most popular acts are as well... the Beatles were an engineered social experiment that spared no expense that got out of the hands of the establishment, integrated sophisticated Crowley magic that cooked the music product that gave it a timeless and mystical quality... so the Beatles were not organic nor where they manufactured... so you had classical music theory integrated into much of the songs to elevate the product by Martin as well as other people and studio musicians in the background... then you had the genius of the individual Beatles bringing in ideas to add to this corporate foundation.... so the Beatles were the first or a big bang that spread

Interesting take. But they would always been as popular, albeit with slightly slower progress without Epstein. The personalities, humour and being completely comfortable, likeable and composed in front of the media was critical. Can not teach that or manipulate it, they could just do it. The music was also fresh and original compared to their stuff around at the time. Epstein was pretty much marketing a "sure thing" .Completely different to other pop stars of the time. Plus, the Americans could understand the soft Liverpudlian accents (If they had been Geordie or Brummie who knows!) and the music was American influenced as well. All boxes ticked. Epstein in effect speeded up the process to superstardom, which would have definitely happened anyway.

When McCartney came to Chicago ‘s United Center in 2002, we knew the owner’s personal assistant. We had free backstage/bar passes w/ vip parking. McCartney actually brought horses in trailers there by parking lot. . We talked to a very nice caretaker from England. When it came time to go backstage to meet him, I just couldn’t do it. I was too afraid of fainting. On the other hand my sister and brother in law left concert after 30 minutes saying, “we’re bored.” Unbelievable.

I am a slightly older music fan than James, so my exposure to The Beatles was different. When I was a teenager, after an eclectic assortment of childhood taste, the first musical pheneomenon that happened was Acid House. This introduced me to the Psychedelic sounds of the 1960s, and especially The Beatles. Also around at that time, guitars and dance started to merge. When Britpop happened it was a welcome revival of the swinging sixties in the form of cool Britannia and it was a glorious time for new music. The music press had a couple of major albums it seemed every week and the people in the NME and Melody Maker were soon in the tabloids too. But The Beatles so not transcend these times purely on music or influence, sales or status. There is a sense of destiny there, but also a philosophy, an outlook and a message. For me, personally, they become a way of life. That may sound extreme, but my attitude to politcs is based on the four, my humour is dry, learned from them and my father who is a big fan too. Spirituality... But I think what defines the band is one word. Growth. People grow with the band and they are the archetype of a great story. Traumatic childhoods, hard work, insane levels of fame for very extraordinary people who remained grounded. They always sought to grow, always gave those behind them a leg up, and even when competing, had friendly, rather than nasty rivalries. It is one of the reasons they are so blessed. They, by being themselves, and true to themselves, were always somehow not only in the right place at the right time, but became the right place at the right time. Jackson, and Madonna rather than Taylor (who is coming up) are the only others with that level of fame. Sorry, but The Stones were great musically, but as Icons I feel lacked something despite their obvious charisma... But Jackson, much as I love him and his music, became isolated as his fame increased and he adopted the posture of Jesus. Paul. Still uses public transport. Both The Beatles and Jackson have their merits, but as inspiration? Look at their lives beyond music too... Thejr attitude to women as they grew. The Beatles went from birds to those who were their equal as the liberation of their era became more accepted. Jackson had issues in that regard. The Beatles searched for God, Jackson invited adulation. But mainly, I think, Jackson defined the times, whereas The Beatles set the agenda for the times. Oasis are a comparison too. Another big influence. But Oasis, as much as they sang about love and the Beatles were more like the Stornes in attitude. At the height of their popularity and creativity the four called out those looking to live in Downing Street in Taxman, while Noel supped champers at the supernova heights of his, not that he does not regret it, but that too was a sign of the times. These are of course opinions, not judgements Jackson got me through my childhood. Oasis saw me through my twenties. The Beatles have often saved and guided my life. I guess for me ultimately, that is the difference.

@vordman

18 күн бұрын

Jackson just sold a lot of records to kids. He was an MTV star but there's little merit in his work. And he certainly didn't develop as an artist. His best work was early on in his career. His star has already diminished. Like Elvis Presley's has. The Beatles are still revered and I guess always will be.

@hulagirl.kailua

17 күн бұрын

Perfectly said, perfectly reacted to, perfect comparisons. Couldn't have put it any better, and I lived it...was 14 in October of 1963 when "I want to hold your hand" hit the airways of KFWB Los Angeles. NOONE compared to anything I heard or saw. They were the innovators and the forefront for our entire generation...Stones were okay, but the Beatles were an experience. Mahalo Nui Loa.

Bah humbug. The Beatles are great by themselves. Adding some hype does not explain the longevity of their popularity. There IS a magic separate from the songs. It is the way they play and interact, their sound. You dont need anything else to explain it. Not 'a lens' not a mania. They became even more popular after they stopped touring. I discovered them during a Beatles popularity lull in 1975. Wings were on top. A friend put on 'no reply' from 'rubber soul'. I saw the light. But if you dont hear the magic you will explain their phenomena by other means. So, there's gold in them hills. You just need to open the curtains. A small push will do it. Given all the hype 'now and then' still sounds like a so so project with overblown effects. Overhyped, for the modern audience. Give me Get back any day. Magic..as witnessed. No hype needed just careful exposure. It is all there to begin with..

People in Soviet Union were cut off from Beatles in 1960s and discovered their music in 1970s and 80s and still loved the music

What a video mate! I picked up a guitar 7 months ago and like many, became obsessed with how I could become the size of the of the Beatles or Oasis. Although the creative side is massively important, I’ve been analysing the business side of these bands and comparing them. Will definitely give the Brian Epstein book a read, Thank you for such a boss video!

@14:06 😃 *So glad to see/hear you mention these brilliant creators! (esp Guthrie Goven!)* 😊🤘🏼

i cant agree with your thesis about the beatles are heard through the ears of media and exposure which helps to make the beatles sound better than they actually are making people think like sheep i agree with about brian epstein being a great manager pity elvis had such a bad one and the timing of the early sixties was perfect for band to cheer us all up especially america after the loss of president john kennedy but what made these cheeky four lads from black and white liverpool to become the musicians to open up the world to colour and absolute joy was their life changing music im 75 now and have listened all sorts of music from great classical works blues rock and good old pop but maybe apart from lark ascending by ralph vaughan williams the majority of the beatles songs are the only ones that make me laugh smile and cry sometimes all three in one song

The Beatles sold twice as many records, as the next level of competition.

It's gonna be very hard to have another Beatles. Back then, celebrities in general had a certain aura and mystique about them because their exposure to the public was carefully planned and controlled and limited to few outlets, so curating a certain image was easier. But now, in the age of information/misinformation, it's quite hard to control what everyone thinks of a public figure because any undesired information, factual or otherwise, can slip from the act's management team's grasp and spread uncontrollably, damaging that image beyond repair. All the celebrity DUIs, mugshots, me toos, scandals, etc across the internet made the public view celebrities as normal people with flaws so that mystique about them is no longer there. The best an act can hope to reach now is level 3.

Brian Epstein and George Martin fell in love with them and knew they would be great even at the start. They had such charm that people who worked with them held them in great affection.

L&Mc were great song writers.Who are the song writers today ? maybe Sheeran,Swift,Adele.Too many songs today are written to order by faceless musicians.You could probably get to swiftie levels of hysteria if you can pen a decent song and have a target audience of teenage girls,the Beatles appealed to every generation.

James is correct. There is more involved in understanding the Beatles' enduring appeal than the great tunes, the innovative albums, the cheeky witticisms, the mop top haircuts, and so on. Other bands and artists had all those qualities and have not achieved the Beatles' stratospheric heights. So what is it? I feel it can best be explained by the manner in which the four components of the band complimented each other and, in toto, represented a fully-formed ideal human. Once the two films were released and fans got to know each Beatle as an individual, certain archetypes became associated with each one. John, the intellectual. Paul, the romantic. George, the spiritual. Ringo, the joyous. The head, the heart, the soul and the spirit. Together they formed a powerful combination that still resonates to this day. No other band, no other performer did anything similar. The religious paradigm, I feel, is valid. Who knows? Perhaps it's time to think about the Church of the Holy Beatles?

I'm not sure such hysteria as Beatlemania is even possible in our modern day and age. They were incredibly revolutionary in their time and one of few rock bands in the world at that time. It was all so brand new at that time. The Beatles were the first band I ever listened to and liked as a kid. I remember listening to them on my father's old record player back in 1993-1995 ish. However, Oasis was a band I chose for myself on a whim. "Some might say" changed my life forever. It was a catalyst for attending university, which lead me to a study abroad and later living overseas for 8 years. Thanks Noel!

Truly an excellent explanation. Makes perfect sense.

Great video, and your love and worship for them shines through, as would mine. A very minor point that I would like to point out, but it might help to put things in a bit of context. The Ed Sullivan Show was not a "Talk" or "Chat" show as you said but what was Called a "Variety" with different acts from classical musicians to international circus acts and Ed would barely ask them 2 or 3 questions standing up with no chairs or sofas or desk or table. They were also watched by the whole family from small children like me, I was 4 at the time of The Beatles first appearance, with my older siblings, my parents, my grandparents and even any guests that were over on Sunday evenings. Thanks for the video and for your heartfelt story.

Before the Beatles all the magic happened on the stage. After the Beatles bands didn't have to tour, as the studio became the most important place not the stage. The studio became an instrument in itself, where music would be created that could not be duplicated on stage. We'll never see a revolution like that again.

I've always said that like them or loathe them, no hater of the Beatles could seriously claim that they were 'rubbish' or lacking in talent. They are objectively talented, and objectively good at what they did.

Somebody in the last 60+ years needed to figure this out, and you have done a great job.

I believe it's more than just PR. There's a hell of a lot of perfectly aligned variables that goes into success like that. Most of which are beyond anyone's control.

Will be talked about in 500 years off the charts

Personally - and I am ready for the hate here - I think the only act comparable to the Beatles meteoric rise at the moment is Taylor Swift. Whatever you think of her music, she's pretty much reached (and is possibly exceeding) the levels of hysteria and fame The Beatles had in 1964 - The intense fandom, every album reaching number 1, the numerous thinkpiece articles, the colossal scale and attendance of her concerts, the unheard-of levels of wealth and billionaire status. There's nothing comparable at the moment. I'm fairly certain in future 'best artists' lists it'll probably be The Beatles, Taylor Swift - then everyone else at this point, and I'm saying this as someone who likes a few songs, but hasn't heard the majority of her work yet.

@bigmike4962

17 күн бұрын

I was around during Beatlemania and for 60 years I figured we'd never see anything like it again. I was wrong. She has reached that level imo.

In the early Sixties, I went to high school dances where the early Beatles were played. No one was particularly into music in my high school, and the Beatles were just another group. We all knew that girls screamed over them, and that that was sort of embarrassing, but it was easy to ignore. In those years, I don't remember a single discussion about pop music, with anyone. I was into classical and despised pop music, except for soul, because I recognized that it had pleasant harmonies and a good danceable beat. The lyrics, on the other hand, were predictably commercial and childish. Then I went to college. Rubber Soul had just come out. This was clearly TOTALLY DIFFERENT from everything before it. Secondly, I was listening to it while stoned on pot. Thirdly, it was considered important. People were talking about pop music--mainly about the lyrics. Groups like the Jefferson Airplane, Bob Dylan, Simon and Garfunkel, the Beatles had important things to say. No one ever talked about the musicianship; it was the poetry and the messages that people were paying attention to most. We weren't screaming for the Beatles, but we listened to these group with reverence. They were spiritual leaders. I loved the Beatles, like most people at my college, but I didn't even know who played what, outside of the fact that Ringo played the drums. You make an interesting point about Now and Then. I wouldn't even listen to it for a long time, because I just didn't want to be disappointed, and I assumed it would be at best second-rate. I watched it with the video and was pleasantly surprised. It wasn't a great tune, but definitely good, especially compared with the Taylor Swift junk coming out now. As for all the nostalgia attached to it, it seemed both natural and justified, given that it is a melancholy song to begin with. Things can change meaning contextually. I hated the Bee Gees in their disco phase because disco was a know-nothing, anti-political backlash to the Sixties. Now that that historical context is gone, I can listen to the Bee Gees without all that political baggage.

I would add many other facts too. They achieved these record sales when you had to go to the shop and buy the vinyl not just download it. If fans now have to go somewhere and buy the record what would the sales be? Also the records they made in the 60's (and beyond) have been resold many many times to collectors so there true sales are probably double what was pressed. They wrote about 300+ songs of which at least 100 are at the top level of songwriting and will always be played and listened too. If you look at those top 500 albums of all time there are about 8 of the 12 albums they made which make regular appearances in the chart while everything else peaked and fell away in other words their albums will always be in that league while everything else is a fashion. The other thing was each new album was better than the one before and peaked with Abbey Road Let It Be was not quite as good but recorded before Abbey Road how many bands have managed that? They also sold millions of records as solo artists after the Beatles. The Beatles were the best there ever was and will never be surpassed UNLESS they write more than 300 songs that are better and nobody is likely to do that. The Beatles will always be the best, enough said.

I heard Hey Jude in a shop not knowing anything about the song and the artists, and it changed my life. I can truly say that for me, the Beatles’ brilliance is unmediated by their god-like fame. They were the best, and there is no comparison.

The Beatles' music is universal.

I love your stuff man big respect. The recording seems to have a fuzz on it . X

My late friend wrote hit pop songs before the beatles and was a millionaire because of the sales, if the beatles are not top for selling records then, that should tell you something, they were just in the right place at the right time, plus they sat in a studio putting together songs from other influences, Lennon in an interview said he wrote songs to sound like other people, Roy Orbison for example, it's obvious they will remain top they done it first, Edison is known for inventing the light bulb, he didn't.

@AdamMarkAteMyHamster

18 күн бұрын

Sure 😂

@northernengland

18 күн бұрын

@@AdamMarkAteMyHamster which bit is funny?

Just my perception of why this is: A lot of artists since, don't go through what the Beatles did IN REAL TIME: Their Please Please Me phase is their initial release. Success goes to their heads - for the follow up let's just skip STRAIGHT to the Sgt Pepper phase. "We're big as The Beatles now, time to change music!" (never mind the 6 albums and all the growth the Beatles actually did to reach their Sgt. Pepper phase.) The new stuff doesn't go over quite so well, time to graduate straight into the "Let it Be" phase, members rage-quitting the band, fighting, all the outside drama- but nothing really helping the music- burnout, breakup, time for the lead "I'm too good for this band!" member's solo career.... it's over. A band that actually stuck around and went through all the real time growth and discovery and learning and delivering KILLER albums and singles all along that legions of fans actually crave, might be able to achieve the same success. But to my ear, few have actually gotten past themselves even to attempt it.

brilliant as usual!

It’s not just the music. It was also the time they came. The most perfect timing in history.Their look, their charisma and attitudes and personalities . The state of the US and Western world at the time after the assassination of JFK. A couple years right before the hippie movement that they played a part in popularizing. All of this along with the rise of teenagers, which many don’t know or never realized that teenagers weren’t always a concept or thing you were either a child or an adult, but the Beatles were the first before One direction or Justin Bieber, before everyone to have a rabbit like fan base of mostly teenagers. The Beatles along with Beatlemania was unlike anything the world has seen.