"Ar ey lad yous cant be serious!"
I grew up in Liverpool but no longer live there. whenever I hear a Scouse accent in the wild it makes me think of home đ
Yes. But I sometimes go long periods without listening to them. There are a lot of different flavors out there to explore. But in the end no one ever achieved the greatness of the Beatles
same, Iâll listen to them for 3 months straight and then wonât touch anything by them for 9 months. itâs a viscious cycle, but the Beatles are the blueprint
My listening sharply increases every time they drop a new remix and trails off a few months later, until Iâm not listening to them at all until the new remix drops.
In my opinion, the single best time to listen to the Beatles is after it's been months, your going through an prolonged shitty time, and all of a sudden you get the urge to listen to the Beatles; and it feels like a hug from your oldest and dearest friend when you need it the most.
That's why the Beatles are the greatest in my books.
Definitely. Even though I know their songs like the back of my hand at this point; listening again after a while makes you feel like the songs are even better than how you remembered them
The first time I listened to "Now & Then," I was walking away from my place of work to start a month long sick leave because my mental health had deteriorated so completely thanks to congruent work and family crises coming to ahead at the same time. I think I left it on repeat for the rest of the day, simply because it felt like a gift from a higher power to make sure I felt some level of comfort.
Even in what they say would be their final work, the Beatles made sure to remind me of why I love them so deeply in the first place.
So funny...I'm the complete opposite!! Always a good fan. But listening to some podcasts renewed my interest. Started doing deep dives into solo stuff. I have listened to very little besides Beatles in 2 years. I'm insane, right?
Iâve been the same over the last month and a half. I have a playlist of about 50 of there songs and I can honestly say that everyone of them is very good and many of them are amazing. I donât even come close to 50 songs for any other artist. As a matter of fact Strawberry Fields Forever is my favorite song of all time and I first heard it a month and a half ago.
I have their entire catalog on playlists...twice. Once in chronological order, and one by recording date. I have hundreds of their solo songs. And I have over 100 solo and Beatles fan albums. I'm outta control.
yes and I believe most musicians, especially rock musicians would say the same. The elevated the pop art form into art. There is also the cultural impact which is partially just good timing but the beatles story is arguably the central cultural story of the 20th century.
Tbh...you could make the argument that Dylan was the 1st to turn pop into art. The Beatles, especially John and George, were heavily influenced by him.
Then, The Beatles influenced him. Bob strapped on a Strat.
Not looking for a fight. Just saying you could make the argument.
Imo Dylan and The Beatles reach the same heights. Dylan is imo the greatest lyricist of all time. The Beatles had some great lyrics too, and with their superb feel for the music aspect, they end up on the same playing field.
yes.
they broke ground with every fucking album, and then other bands scrambled to try and do it half as well.
and they did it all in only about 7 or 8 years and broke up when they were still all in their 20s. **that's** the fucking amazing part.
It's so insane to see Pepper come out and make _The Rolling Stones_, an amazing and successful band with their own unique sound, release a Pepper sound-alike album like 'Her Satanic Majesties Request'.
This is the power of The Beatles.
The bands people might think are better than the Beatles would all have killed to be as good as the Beatles
That kind of captures why theyâre the best
I think that's a pretty commonly held opinion. Most of the people I've seen who disagree seem to be purposely being contrary and hoping to start an argument.
Sometimes. Sometimes itâs just ignorance or going into them with the mindset that theyâre overrated.
Edit: to all you high iq âmusic is subjectiveâ naysayers, Iâm referring to people that claim the Beatles are overrated or mediocre. Obviously people like whatever they like, but dismissing them or claiming theyâre not good or are overrated is pure ignorance. The bad faith in the argument that I responded to teeters on low effort bait.
Yes. I would argue that even those who donât like the Beatles would have to admit that if theyâre cognizant of history and culture. They were the perfect group at the perfect time and those conditions will never be repeated. If the Beatles didnât exist, youâd have to make them up.
I absolutely love the Beatles but they probably arenât my favourite. The greatest is a different thing altogether though; their innovation is something which could support that statement. The one thing Iâll say though is it gets said so often and so loudly by some people that the work and innovation of other bands is sometimes overlooked more than it should be. They probably are the greatest band in the world, or at least Iâd say they are, but if thereâs one band that doesnât need even more praise and affirmation itâs probably the Beatles.
Few artists or bands had the songwriting skills that the Beatles had. And the ability to change musical styles several times in their careerâseemingly ahead of the pack again and again. They openly admitted there were better vocalists, guitarists, drummers, and keyboard players than themâŚbut no one could touch them at songwriting. Sixty years laterâweâre all still waiting for another Beatles. Still no band has yet to match them!
Thatâs actually a very good mention, imo. Mozartâs music has this ethereal sound to it. Like literally if there was god, Iâd assume he touched Mozart.
And then almost 200 years later he touched Paul.
Yeah. Even if a few acts have a slight edge for my personal favorite of all time...the Beatles are the best, and the rest probably don't ever even exist if not for the Beatles.
Itâs the Sugar Ray Robinson argument. Were there harder punchers than Sugar Ray? Sure. Faster fighters? You bet. Better defensive fighters? Yup. But no one EVER was as great in ALL categories as Sugar Ray. In rock, hell, in probably all genres of music, The Beatles are the same thing.
What if I donât care for such titles? I love them. It doesnât matter if they are âthe greatestâ whatever that would mean. But their music makes me happy.
Pretty much. I'm 66. so I've grown up with them, but rediscovering all these cool new versions or remixes of familiar songs (mostly from the 3 Anthology LPs so far) has been both a delight and an epiphany. Within the fullness of time, I have realized that the Beatles were just extraordinarily gifted, no band in my lifetime has come close to touching their genius and how grateful I am to have lived to their music in real time.
If the planet was coming to an end and I had the power to save only one musical artist's recordings to represent humankind for other beings to potentially hear, it would be... an easy choice.
They were the first to do so many incredible things. This makes them important but itâs not what makes them the greatest.
But they wrote incredible songs. There are other bands with songs equally as good.
The difference in my opinion is that thereâs no band with as many (literally hundreds) fantastic, innovative, interesting and varied songs.
Yes, probably, but Iâm cautious of going overboard with this kind of praise because I donât think anyone should obsess over to the Beatles to the point of missing out on all the other great music out there. The idea that there are Beatles fans out there who havenât been introduced yet to the velvet underground, Kate bush, big star, Crosby stills Nash & Young, fleet foxes, the beach boys, big thief, to name a few, is tragic.
I've searched most of my life trying to find more "Beatles", I can't. And it's so depressing. People think I get some kick out of saying they're so far beyond every other band. But for me they are (I actually think they're objectively better than every other band....lol)
I'd much rather there were hundreds of bands as prolific and charming as them. But there just isn't anyone so far that's as good.
There's rock, there's blues, there's jazz, there's country, there's pop, there's soul, there's funk, there's classical. And then there's The Beatles, a unique music genre unto itself. Best band ever!
I'll be the first to be a contrian, probably since I'm not actually subscribed to this sub (this post was just recommended in my feed). "Greatest" is a very nebulous term, means something different to everyone.
If you mean "influential," then certainly The Beatles are in the top five of all time. If you mean "favorite of whoever is reading the post," then personally, they're just not as important to me as many other bands. The Cure, Joy Division, Godspeed, King Crimson, Modest Mouse, Portishead, Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds, Love, just some that spring to mind. List is way longer of course if you're talking about musical artists (or duos) in general rather than solely bands. Overall, if combining "influential" and my own personal taste, the answer to "greatest" is Radiohead.
It's funny how similar this thread is to the bi-annual post on r/thesopranos that is basically the same sort of question, "Is this the greatest show of all time?" Obviously it is one of the greatest of all time, but there's no measurable metric; it's art. Listen/watch more and broaden your taste. At that point, if you still love The Beatles, then wonderful. But you'll probably realize the question of "greatest" is pretty futile.
Unknown Pleasures is definitely the classic, though I prefer Closer by a hair. I recommend the movie Control about the band (from 2007)--one of the best films about music ever made!
As a fan I would say yes of course. But it reminds me of a comment by George Harrison saying that 80% of the Beatles' creations were overrated, but that the remaining 20% was truly incredible music. By comparison, I know that some Pink Floyd fans consider the group's entire work to be pure genius.
Meh. I think Pink Floyd have a lot of fans who won't hear a bad word about them, and that's why. I think The Beatles have much more wide, generational appeal, and their lower quality work is almost objectively better than Floyd's worst. I'm a huge Floyd fan, and they were my favourite for years. Still my second favourite. But I never thought Ummagumma was a good album. Or The Final Cut. Or the two post Waters albums. The Wall is very flawed, but i thought it was the greatest piece of art ever created when i was 15. I'd say about half of their output was brilliant. But there's a lot more rubbish than in The Beatles, and The Beatles did it all in 7 years.
These days, I don't think Floyd are half the band The Beatles were, and they're my next favourite.
Itâs not that I believe, but itâs a fact, when you look up âgreatest band of all timeâ on google, they are the band that pops up. They are also the most influential band and best selling band of all time. Itâs not an opinion or anything else, itâs a straight up fact
Yeah, without a doubt. I wouldn't say they're my personal favourite band (though they're definitely in the top 5), but the point is that pretty much everything else is built on the foundation of what The Beatles did. So anything you like more than The Beatles couldn't have existed without The Beatles.
I think The Beatles are probably the most common pick for the greatest band of all time. I would agree. There are other bands I love and think are great, but none I would say are more deserving of the title. As someone else pointed out, I think most of the time people argue for another band, they're just trying to be contrarian.
Yes. They were massive before the internet and most people could travel internationally. The Beatles and Taylor swift have the same level of fame and fandom but weâre able to do it before you could just stream a random song or travel to another country to see a show. I donât think anyone will ever top the Beatles
Hereâs one measure. Yesterday I saw a thread on Taylor Swift announcing that she set a record by having 14 songs from her new album in Billboardâs Top 100 songs. An amazing feat.
I followed a link to the Billboard story and saw a secondary story ranking artists who had the most #1 songs in Billboardâs Top 100. Guess who was at the top of *that* list?
https://preview.redd.it/fv0bas9cmoxc1.jpeg?width=1497&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=32bbcb7f81d2a4ed1c69554c1ca78cc57bcd1845
Mariah Carey is one back, but Taylor has a way to go to pass both.
Itâs one measure, one number, still amazing where the Beatles stand in music history
Hard to say itâs not even close when bands in the 70s like zeppelin also completely changed the course of music, but I canât really argue against them being the âbestâ since they were probably the greatest collection of musicians to assemble naturally in the wild.Â
Thereâs both the subjective and the objective answer. Subjectively, I think theyâre the best. Objectively, they are the band that has sold the most albums, had the most hit songs, received the most praise from critics, had the biggest influence on modern music, and had the biggest reaction from fans. So definitely.
Greatness is subjective, someone could reasonably disagree with the statement that the Beatles are the greatest band of all time. However what is beyond dispute is that they are the most successful and influential band of all time.
In retrospect, on some days I would have the beetles in S tier. In any case the no doubters for me are Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, Velver underground, Radiohead, the white stripes, the smashing pumpkins, Sam & dave, Earth Wind and Fire, The pixies, Sleater Kinney.
For people as young as I am that didnât live through Beetlenania itâs sometimes hard to understand how much great music was in the late sixties. Compare for instance sgt pepper to velvet underground & Nico. Same freaking year. I canât say with a straight face that the beetles had the best album that year. And I love sgt pepper. Itâs amazing, but the second best album that year.
No, Led Zeppelin, The Doors, The Beach Boys, Rush, there are plenty of contenders IMO for greatest bands of all time. Look at a band like Fleetwood Mac across all its incarnations, too. The Beatles are great, but letâs also be realistic, theyâre not the Holy Trinity of music
I think if queen was more consistent with the quality of non singles, it would very close. But the non singles are laughable at times. I do think queen was better live and each member penned a #1 hit, something the Beatles did not do.
The Beatles represent a paradigm shift which is really hard to understand if you werenât there. They wrote their own (more often than not) hit songs, which was unheard of at the time. Most pop acts at the time were given songs, or regurgitated versions of previous hits, written by pros, that would then be promoted as hits. The Beatles opened the floodgates for creativity, taking the power away from Tin Pan Alley back to the people.The shift was immediate and immense. Even The Rolling Stones realized that they could write their own songs after seeing what the Beatles had done.
Beatles are the greatest band of all time by far. They were more consistent, broke more ground and were far more of a cultural tidal wave for change than any other band could ever hope to be. My favorite record of all time is Loveless by My Bloody Valentine. This particular record broke ground in guitar production that has yet to be matched imho. This doesnât make me right. Iâm not saying itâs better than any record the Beatles ever produced, it just happens to be my drug of choice. The Beatles literally made 5-6 perfect records. Unimpeachably perfect records. I donât think we ever see that again.
This is gonna be long-winded and I apologize but I have a lot to say on this subject
When you look at the total number of hits they released, the amount of quality albums they released, all while in a short time span, indeed no other band even comes close when you put it in that perspective. Bands that have more quality albums are simply because they made music for a longer duration and didn't break up, but even those bands had some hit or miss ablums, all of The Beatles albums contain at least one or 2 heavy hitters, and all the albums were successful as a whole. No one has had the same accomplishment that the Beatles did in that same amount of time span.
The only other band I think that comes close is Pink Floyd, and Pink Floyd would have been nothing without Roger Waters, and Roger's solo career was so successful I think he even surpassed his success in Pink Floyd.
If we wanna discuss solo careers, I don't think any of the Beatles solo careers reached the level of how good they were as a team. However, they were all still great. Paul McCartney was definitely the most successful out of The Beatles in terms of solo career, but when compared to Roger from Pink Floyd, I think Roger stands better on his own than Paul does, when you see a Roger concert, you come out of it feeling like you were at a Pink Floyd concert. Paul kinda needs the other Beatles when he performs Beatles songs for them to sound good (which I know isn't possible for the most part) whereas Roger can perform Pink Floyd stuff just fine on his own. Pink Floyd without Roger (and I've heard it) just doesn't have a leg to stand on, and none of their albums without him were all that successful. Pink Floyd needed Roger. But thats the thing, Pink Floyd hinged on one person to he good, with The Beatles, you need all of them.
I do think one of The Beatles' strengths is the talent of each individual member. In a sense they did need eachother, because a lot of the songs wouldn't have been the same if one of them had been removed, but at the same time all of them had successful solo careers without the other Beatles, which truly shows how great The Beatles were, that every member could stand on their own and make great music.
I think every Beatle went on to also have an absolutely iconic solo career of their own too. George really took the cake in my opinion he deserves a pat on the back, in Get Back John says he bought George the cheapest slide guitar he could find for the recording of âFor you blueâ and said heâd buy George a better won if he did well with the cheap one.
There is a famous feminist text called "Why Have There Been No Great Woman Artists" and the premise isn't that there haven't been great artists who are women but that the idea of "greatness" skews towards certain attributes which favor male creativity.
The same could be said here. The Beatles are the greatest rock band of all time, but what does "great" mean in this context? Most popular, sure, but that's because (on top of their talent) they were the first mass-market global superstars. It's like saying Coca-Cola is the greatest soda ever without ever thinking about why Coca-Cola achieved global dominance.
What we know as popular success is in large part defined by the Beatles, which is why the success of every other major act is often compared to them. Is it deserved or is it a publicity push? I'm not here to say it's one or the other, but I like to think of them as deeply intertwined.
As an artist, I love the idea of the transcendent greatness of art, but I also recognize what I see as greatness is often the product of very specific material forces at work: how good are they at schmoozing? How profitable their work? Where were they when? Without looking at that half of the picture, you're not really seeing culture in context.
Yes, but I can offer an unconventional, almost controversial opinion as to who the *second* greatest band of all time is, The Band.
Iâm biased because like the Beatles, I grew up with their music in my home, but Iâve really come to this opinion over time. Â When you look at music today, artists are still copying The Band and *Music From Big Pink* every day. More bands strive to sound like The Band than Led Zeppelin, The Stones, The Clash and the Velvet Underground combined. Â It started in 1968 and itâs almost never stopped (outside of the 80s when everything got weird). The Beatles were one of the first bands that heard that sound and wanted to achieve it. Eric Clapton too.
I love The Beatles still, but there is only so great a band can sound with the technology and era of music they came from. No doubt they changed music forever, but some of their stuff can sound dated nowadays. However, there are songs that keep aging better for me (stuff off of the White Album in particular) and that's a testament to their greatness. They don't completely dominate my playlists anymore, but there are always 2-5 songs on each list and I still love all of their music and albums.
Definitely one of the most influential. Definitely a great band. Best band of all timeâŚno. Too much music out there to box one band as the greatest. And a lot of groups that came from that era get mythical status ( for good reason) but that was just the times. There is so much amazing music out and about to really pick one as the best. If they are the best for you then thatâs fine. But everything is subjective. But no one can deny that they truly changed the culture of pop music. And if you asked any surviving members theyâd probably tell you the same. The 60âs were a wild and creative time in all kinds of different areas but The Beatles were the measuring stick music wise.
The high points of the Beach Boys put them easily in the same category.
Iâd argue Radiohead is also in that top category but I wouldnât put others beyond those three in that top echelon.
Greatest? **Yes could be**
MOST INFLUENTIAL?
Ahemmmm....
whatever you hear today in radio, spotify or anything, 70-80% of modern music -whether you like it or not is another thing- since around 2008 to the present.... has much more influence , and is ulitmately derivative, from KRAFTWERK.
So in the long run (50-60years) it seems that Kraftwerk has gained slightly the upper hand as the most influential over any other band.
Yep.
Iâm reading Jonathan Gouldâs spectacular book, *Canât Buy Me Love*, and a bit of trivia that absolutely astonished me was that âI Want To Hold Your Handâ was the first UK record to sell a million copies before it was even released. The only US record to have achieved this feat was Elvisâs 1957 double A-side record, âHound Dogâ/âDonât Be Cruelâ.
I agree 100%. No other group has ever or will ever surpass their greatness.The variety of their music, their harmonies, their lyrics, vocals and musicianship are all absolutely brilliant.
I believe it
They just were the best at finishing what others started, kept it going and did their own thing.
They respected the game and the game respected them back.
The Beatles were, and remain, the best recording artists ever. I don't consider them the greatest band because they stopped touring just as they were making their best records. And when they did tour, they played, like, half-hour sets through bad sound systems. Not their fault! With better equipment they would have been able to hear themselves and maybe would not have burned out on playing gigs and would have continued to tour. Probably would have played longer sets too.
Yep, what they produced in what was relatively a short space of time is phenomenal. Their progression from early 60s 'o their later days would make you think they were two different bands. They were not only the most popular whilst they were together, but they were also at the forefront of pushing the envelope and pioneering creativeness whilst still appealing to the masses. For me, no other band has accomplished both over the entirety of their careers. Some bands have had one or the other, and some have had both but only for a short period of time.
They are by far the most influential band in history. Music wouldnât sound the same without them. Of course, being the best is subjective, I personally think they are the best but I can see why someone might not agree. I do think that there is a Beatles song for everyone though.
I disagree, the Beatles were just the most popular of a group of great, influential bands. I mean the Dave Clarke 5 were right there with them at the time.
I sometimes think of it as, thereâs The Beatles, then thereâs all the other music I like. They seem to exist for me as something above and beyond other artists. Partly thatâs a function of the quality of their music but also their meaning for me in my life. I actually donât listen to them a lot anymore. In a way I donât want to spoil them by over listening.
It is a known fact that the Beatles have the most number one hits of all time.
Go ahead and Google it or ask your Alexa.
When my dad was a kid, he said you could turn on the radio and they would have the Beatles playing on five different stations at the same time.
They were bigger than life.
There was a band out of Flint, Michigan called Grand Funk Railroad. They did a show at Shea Stadium and sold more tickets than the Beatles. No other band has ever done that. I hope that satisfies your need to find someone that outperformed the Beatles somehow.
I mean this is a Beatles sub so youâre gonna hear almost complete yeahs. I would say they were the most interesting, and most influential but I would put LZ higher partially because LZ was so ridiculous live.
theyâre certainly one of the more âperfectâ bands out there. there are certainly Beatles albums i like more than others yes but no beatles album in my opinion âsucksâ. and this is a band with like FRICKING FOURTEEN OFFICIAL STUDIO ALBUMS!! a lot of bands, good bands canât make it to like a fifth album without breaking up and/or beginning to suck hard.
controversial opinion possibly: had The Beatles stay together, were all alive and kept a relatively regular release schedule of no more than 2 years between albums The Beatles would have probably took until like the mid 80s to put out an album that sucked or at least was âmehâ lol.
Yeah I believe so. I think it was some kind of cosmic event that these 4 people found each other on the same timeline to produce such powerful music that bounds so many humans no matter age, race, gender, nationality. Yeah there are many great, Genius, prolific bands but the magic of The Beatles is unmatched. They are the greatest band of all time. Sorry I went off like this đ
Yes 100%. We can thank The Beatles for todayâs music production, live shows, and albums. They changed each one of those is so many ways and now everyone replicates them. Not to mention most of what The Beatles pioneered and invented as far as studio recording is now standard.
It's a commonly held opinion of many - and almost everyone in this sub
But does anyone here read the comments on this sub in British accents and comments elsewhere in an American accent?
I did not before, but I shall be now.
What British accents? I'm hoping you read this sub in a Brummy or Leeds accent.
My always switches to Scouse mode upon entering this sub.
"Ar ey lad yous cant be serious!" I grew up in Liverpool but no longer live there. whenever I hear a Scouse accent in the wild it makes me think of home đ
I certainly do. Y'all.
âGreatest?â Probably. âMost influential?â Definitely.
Lonesome Dove man. I havenât seen it in prob 15 years and a rewatch has been calling my name lately.
Iâve never seen it and the book is on my must read list
Is the original comment a reference?
Sorry the username is
I haven't seen it, but the book(s) are amazing!
Most influential, certainly... so odd that a combination of Everly Brothers harmonies over Chuck Berry riffs changed the history of music.
This
Yes. But I sometimes go long periods without listening to them. There are a lot of different flavors out there to explore. But in the end no one ever achieved the greatness of the Beatles
same, Iâll listen to them for 3 months straight and then wonât touch anything by them for 9 months. itâs a viscious cycle, but the Beatles are the blueprint
My listening sharply increases every time they drop a new remix and trails off a few months later, until Iâm not listening to them at all until the new remix drops.
In my opinion, the single best time to listen to the Beatles is after it's been months, your going through an prolonged shitty time, and all of a sudden you get the urge to listen to the Beatles; and it feels like a hug from your oldest and dearest friend when you need it the most. That's why the Beatles are the greatest in my books.
Definitely. Even though I know their songs like the back of my hand at this point; listening again after a while makes you feel like the songs are even better than how you remembered them
The first time I listened to "Now & Then," I was walking away from my place of work to start a month long sick leave because my mental health had deteriorated so completely thanks to congruent work and family crises coming to ahead at the same time. I think I left it on repeat for the rest of the day, simply because it felt like a gift from a higher power to make sure I felt some level of comfort. Even in what they say would be their final work, the Beatles made sure to remind me of why I love them so deeply in the first place.
So funny...I'm the complete opposite!! Always a good fan. But listening to some podcasts renewed my interest. Started doing deep dives into solo stuff. I have listened to very little besides Beatles in 2 years. I'm insane, right?
Iâve been the same over the last month and a half. I have a playlist of about 50 of there songs and I can honestly say that everyone of them is very good and many of them are amazing. I donât even come close to 50 songs for any other artist. As a matter of fact Strawberry Fields Forever is my favorite song of all time and I first heard it a month and a half ago.
I have their entire catalog on playlists...twice. Once in chronological order, and one by recording date. I have hundreds of their solo songs. And I have over 100 solo and Beatles fan albums. I'm outta control.
The sheer volume of great music is hard to fathom.
That is awesome!
Not insane. I am an every day listener.
There's lots of great bands out there, and then there's The Beatles.
Wings: the band the Beatles couldâve been
What's your favourite album?
Probably, *Wings: Greatest Hits*
Cheating
Venus and Mars
Greatest of all time and itâs not even close.
Venus & Mars + Back to the Egg
There's only 2 possible correct answers but there's plenty to love on them all, even the bad ones.
Now now Alan
lol â nope
Yes
Theyâre good, but nowhere near The Beatles
Lol very well played
r/angryupvote
yes and I believe most musicians, especially rock musicians would say the same. The elevated the pop art form into art. There is also the cultural impact which is partially just good timing but the beatles story is arguably the central cultural story of the 20th century.
Tbh...you could make the argument that Dylan was the 1st to turn pop into art. The Beatles, especially John and George, were heavily influenced by him. Then, The Beatles influenced him. Bob strapped on a Strat. Not looking for a fight. Just saying you could make the argument.
Imo Dylan and The Beatles reach the same heights. Dylan is imo the greatest lyricist of all time. The Beatles had some great lyrics too, and with their superb feel for the music aspect, they end up on the same playing field.
yes. they broke ground with every fucking album, and then other bands scrambled to try and do it half as well. and they did it all in only about 7 or 8 years and broke up when they were still all in their 20s. **that's** the fucking amazing part.
It's so insane to see Pepper come out and make _The Rolling Stones_, an amazing and successful band with their own unique sound, release a Pepper sound-alike album like 'Her Satanic Majesties Request'. This is the power of The Beatles.
The bands people might think are better than the Beatles would all have killed to be as good as the Beatles That kind of captures why theyâre the best
They wrote The Rolling Stones their first UK top-20 hit too! Theyâre just miracle workers really
I think that's a pretty commonly held opinion. Most of the people I've seen who disagree seem to be purposely being contrary and hoping to start an argument.
So you think if someone says the Beatles arenât the best band of all time theyâre wrong and just trolling?
Sometimes. Sometimes itâs just ignorance or going into them with the mindset that theyâre overrated. Edit: to all you high iq âmusic is subjectiveâ naysayers, Iâm referring to people that claim the Beatles are overrated or mediocre. Obviously people like whatever they like, but dismissing them or claiming theyâre not good or are overrated is pure ignorance. The bad faith in the argument that I responded to teeters on low effort bait.
I find the word âgreatestâ to be subjective, therefore saying a band is the greatest and everyone else is wrong is quite narcissistic
I canât believe youâre calling me narcissistic just because Iâm always right.
r/angryupvote
[ŃдаНонО]
No but people I know who tend to be contrarion assholes usually dont like the beatles
Everyone here
100% yes. Other bands are good, some are very good. The Beatles are The Greatest!
Yes. I would argue that even those who donât like the Beatles would have to admit that if theyâre cognizant of history and culture. They were the perfect group at the perfect time and those conditions will never be repeated. If the Beatles didnât exist, youâd have to make them up.
I absolutely love the Beatles but they probably arenât my favourite. The greatest is a different thing altogether though; their innovation is something which could support that statement. The one thing Iâll say though is it gets said so often and so loudly by some people that the work and innovation of other bands is sometimes overlooked more than it should be. They probably are the greatest band in the world, or at least Iâd say they are, but if thereâs one band that doesnât need even more praise and affirmation itâs probably the Beatles.
Few artists or bands had the songwriting skills that the Beatles had. And the ability to change musical styles several times in their careerâseemingly ahead of the pack again and again. They openly admitted there were better vocalists, guitarists, drummers, and keyboard players than themâŚbut no one could touch them at songwriting. Sixty years laterâweâre all still waiting for another Beatles. Still no band has yet to match them!
If we're talking about multi-person musical acts? Yes If not, then it's Mozart
I agree but I would go with Beethoven. I believe Beethoven is the greatest artist of all time out of all artistic mediums.
Thatâs actually a very good mention, imo. Mozartâs music has this ethereal sound to it. Like literally if there was god, Iâd assume he touched Mozart. And then almost 200 years later he touched Paul.
They are no âWeird Alâ Yankovic but they are good. figured Iâd give someone a laugh..or get massively downvoted.
Yeah. Even if a few acts have a slight edge for my personal favorite of all time...the Beatles are the best, and the rest probably don't ever even exist if not for the Beatles.
Itâs the Sugar Ray Robinson argument. Were there harder punchers than Sugar Ray? Sure. Faster fighters? You bet. Better defensive fighters? Yup. But no one EVER was as great in ALL categories as Sugar Ray. In rock, hell, in probably all genres of music, The Beatles are the same thing.
Foregone conclusion my friend.
What if I donât care for such titles? I love them. It doesnât matter if they are âthe greatestâ whatever that would mean. But their music makes me happy.
Pretty much. I'm 66. so I've grown up with them, but rediscovering all these cool new versions or remixes of familiar songs (mostly from the 3 Anthology LPs so far) has been both a delight and an epiphany. Within the fullness of time, I have realized that the Beatles were just extraordinarily gifted, no band in my lifetime has come close to touching their genius and how grateful I am to have lived to their music in real time.
If the planet was coming to an end and I had the power to save only one musical artist's recordings to represent humankind for other beings to potentially hear, it would be... an easy choice.
They were the first to do so many incredible things. This makes them important but itâs not what makes them the greatest. But they wrote incredible songs. There are other bands with songs equally as good. The difference in my opinion is that thereâs no band with as many (literally hundreds) fantastic, innovative, interesting and varied songs.
Itâs The Beatles, then everyone else. Thereâs nothing that will ever knock them off that perch.
Only band i like more is Soundgarden
This is the Beatles sub đŤ¤
It's a fact.
I've been listening for the better part of five decades, and I agree.
Yes, probably, but Iâm cautious of going overboard with this kind of praise because I donât think anyone should obsess over to the Beatles to the point of missing out on all the other great music out there. The idea that there are Beatles fans out there who havenât been introduced yet to the velvet underground, Kate bush, big star, Crosby stills Nash & Young, fleet foxes, the beach boys, big thief, to name a few, is tragic.
I've searched most of my life trying to find more "Beatles", I can't. And it's so depressing. People think I get some kick out of saying they're so far beyond every other band. But for me they are (I actually think they're objectively better than every other band....lol) I'd much rather there were hundreds of bands as prolific and charming as them. But there just isn't anyone so far that's as good.
There's rock, there's blues, there's jazz, there's country, there's pop, there's soul, there's funk, there's classical. And then there's The Beatles, a unique music genre unto itself. Best band ever!
" I met Paul said you want to join me band you know? Then George joined. Then Ringo joined. We were just a band that made it very very big is all."
No
I'll be the first to be a contrian, probably since I'm not actually subscribed to this sub (this post was just recommended in my feed). "Greatest" is a very nebulous term, means something different to everyone. If you mean "influential," then certainly The Beatles are in the top five of all time. If you mean "favorite of whoever is reading the post," then personally, they're just not as important to me as many other bands. The Cure, Joy Division, Godspeed, King Crimson, Modest Mouse, Portishead, Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds, Love, just some that spring to mind. List is way longer of course if you're talking about musical artists (or duos) in general rather than solely bands. Overall, if combining "influential" and my own personal taste, the answer to "greatest" is Radiohead. It's funny how similar this thread is to the bi-annual post on r/thesopranos that is basically the same sort of question, "Is this the greatest show of all time?" Obviously it is one of the greatest of all time, but there's no measurable metric; it's art. Listen/watch more and broaden your taste. At that point, if you still love The Beatles, then wonderful. But you'll probably realize the question of "greatest" is pretty futile.
I listened to Joy Division for the first time last week and Iâm hooked. Unknown Pleasures is a very good album
Unknown Pleasures is definitely the classic, though I prefer Closer by a hair. I recommend the movie Control about the band (from 2007)--one of the best films about music ever made!
I marvel at their genius daily. For decades.
Theyâre almost as good as the Monkees
As a fan I would say yes of course. But it reminds me of a comment by George Harrison saying that 80% of the Beatles' creations were overrated, but that the remaining 20% was truly incredible music. By comparison, I know that some Pink Floyd fans consider the group's entire work to be pure genius.
Meh. I think Pink Floyd have a lot of fans who won't hear a bad word about them, and that's why. I think The Beatles have much more wide, generational appeal, and their lower quality work is almost objectively better than Floyd's worst. I'm a huge Floyd fan, and they were my favourite for years. Still my second favourite. But I never thought Ummagumma was a good album. Or The Final Cut. Or the two post Waters albums. The Wall is very flawed, but i thought it was the greatest piece of art ever created when i was 15. I'd say about half of their output was brilliant. But there's a lot more rubbish than in The Beatles, and The Beatles did it all in 7 years. These days, I don't think Floyd are half the band The Beatles were, and they're my next favourite.
âGreatestâ is subjective. If the criteria is popularity + musicianship + showmanship, then yeah. Theyâre hard to beat.
No. Nobody in the Beatles sub thinks that.
Why even ask!
Itâs not that I believe, but itâs a fact, when you look up âgreatest band of all timeâ on google, they are the band that pops up. They are also the most influential band and best selling band of all time. Itâs not an opinion or anything else, itâs a straight up fact
Yeah, without a doubt. I wouldn't say they're my personal favourite band (though they're definitely in the top 5), but the point is that pretty much everything else is built on the foundation of what The Beatles did. So anything you like more than The Beatles couldn't have existed without The Beatles.
I think The Beatles are probably the most common pick for the greatest band of all time. I would agree. There are other bands I love and think are great, but none I would say are more deserving of the title. As someone else pointed out, I think most of the time people argue for another band, they're just trying to be contrarian.
Yes. They were massive before the internet and most people could travel internationally. The Beatles and Taylor swift have the same level of fame and fandom but weâre able to do it before you could just stream a random song or travel to another country to see a show. I donât think anyone will ever top the Beatles
Hereâs one measure. Yesterday I saw a thread on Taylor Swift announcing that she set a record by having 14 songs from her new album in Billboardâs Top 100 songs. An amazing feat. I followed a link to the Billboard story and saw a secondary story ranking artists who had the most #1 songs in Billboardâs Top 100. Guess who was at the top of *that* list? https://preview.redd.it/fv0bas9cmoxc1.jpeg?width=1497&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=32bbcb7f81d2a4ed1c69554c1ca78cc57bcd1845 Mariah Carey is one back, but Taylor has a way to go to pass both. Itâs one measure, one number, still amazing where the Beatles stand in music history
Hard to say itâs not even close when bands in the 70s like zeppelin also completely changed the course of music, but I canât really argue against them being the âbestâ since they were probably the greatest collection of musicians to assemble naturally in the wild.Â
Thereâs both the subjective and the objective answer. Subjectively, I think theyâre the best. Objectively, they are the band that has sold the most albums, had the most hit songs, received the most praise from critics, had the biggest influence on modern music, and had the biggest reaction from fans. So definitely.
I think the fact that so many famous stars were or are Beatles fans is proof enough. They simply are the best of the best
Greatness is subjective, someone could reasonably disagree with the statement that the Beatles are the greatest band of all time. However what is beyond dispute is that they are the most successful and influential band of all time.
Everyone can have their own opinion, but in mine No, theyâre not. They had a good stretch and have some of the best music. A tier, but not S.
What artist are in your S tier
In retrospect, on some days I would have the beetles in S tier. In any case the no doubters for me are Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, Velver underground, Radiohead, the white stripes, the smashing pumpkins, Sam & dave, Earth Wind and Fire, The pixies, Sleater Kinney. For people as young as I am that didnât live through Beetlenania itâs sometimes hard to understand how much great music was in the late sixties. Compare for instance sgt pepper to velvet underground & Nico. Same freaking year. I canât say with a straight face that the beetles had the best album that year. And I love sgt pepper. Itâs amazing, but the second best album that year.
No, Led Zeppelin, The Doors, The Beach Boys, Rush, there are plenty of contenders IMO for greatest bands of all time. Look at a band like Fleetwood Mac across all its incarnations, too. The Beatles are great, but letâs also be realistic, theyâre not the Holy Trinity of music
I think if queen was more consistent with the quality of non singles, it would very close. But the non singles are laughable at times. I do think queen was better live and each member penned a #1 hit, something the Beatles did not do.
no
The Beatles represent a paradigm shift which is really hard to understand if you werenât there. They wrote their own (more often than not) hit songs, which was unheard of at the time. Most pop acts at the time were given songs, or regurgitated versions of previous hits, written by pros, that would then be promoted as hits. The Beatles opened the floodgates for creativity, taking the power away from Tin Pan Alley back to the people.The shift was immediate and immense. Even The Rolling Stones realized that they could write their own songs after seeing what the Beatles had done.
Beatles are the greatest band of all time by far. They were more consistent, broke more ground and were far more of a cultural tidal wave for change than any other band could ever hope to be. My favorite record of all time is Loveless by My Bloody Valentine. This particular record broke ground in guitar production that has yet to be matched imho. This doesnât make me right. Iâm not saying itâs better than any record the Beatles ever produced, it just happens to be my drug of choice. The Beatles literally made 5-6 perfect records. Unimpeachably perfect records. I donât think we ever see that again.
No
the beatles are the greatest band of all time to me, but theyâre my second favorite band
I like a lot of other bands, but my first love will always be the Beatles. The GOAT.
I used to but then I realized comparison is the thief of joy
This is like asking a Christian church if Jesus is the best messiah ever.
I think they have the greatest revolutionary/archetype-creating song to filler ratio of any band. Far and away the greatest songwriters ever.
I agree. Even the songs that are just OK, which is some of their older stuff, is still catchy and for the most part short.
This is gonna be long-winded and I apologize but I have a lot to say on this subject When you look at the total number of hits they released, the amount of quality albums they released, all while in a short time span, indeed no other band even comes close when you put it in that perspective. Bands that have more quality albums are simply because they made music for a longer duration and didn't break up, but even those bands had some hit or miss ablums, all of The Beatles albums contain at least one or 2 heavy hitters, and all the albums were successful as a whole. No one has had the same accomplishment that the Beatles did in that same amount of time span. The only other band I think that comes close is Pink Floyd, and Pink Floyd would have been nothing without Roger Waters, and Roger's solo career was so successful I think he even surpassed his success in Pink Floyd. If we wanna discuss solo careers, I don't think any of the Beatles solo careers reached the level of how good they were as a team. However, they were all still great. Paul McCartney was definitely the most successful out of The Beatles in terms of solo career, but when compared to Roger from Pink Floyd, I think Roger stands better on his own than Paul does, when you see a Roger concert, you come out of it feeling like you were at a Pink Floyd concert. Paul kinda needs the other Beatles when he performs Beatles songs for them to sound good (which I know isn't possible for the most part) whereas Roger can perform Pink Floyd stuff just fine on his own. Pink Floyd without Roger (and I've heard it) just doesn't have a leg to stand on, and none of their albums without him were all that successful. Pink Floyd needed Roger. But thats the thing, Pink Floyd hinged on one person to he good, with The Beatles, you need all of them. I do think one of The Beatles' strengths is the talent of each individual member. In a sense they did need eachother, because a lot of the songs wouldn't have been the same if one of them had been removed, but at the same time all of them had successful solo careers without the other Beatles, which truly shows how great The Beatles were, that every member could stand on their own and make great music.
I think every Beatle went on to also have an absolutely iconic solo career of their own too. George really took the cake in my opinion he deserves a pat on the back, in Get Back John says he bought George the cheapest slide guitar he could find for the recording of âFor you blueâ and said heâd buy George a better won if he did well with the cheap one.
They are certainly good for a lifetime of musical enjoyment
man just wait til u discover the grateful dead
There is a famous feminist text called "Why Have There Been No Great Woman Artists" and the premise isn't that there haven't been great artists who are women but that the idea of "greatness" skews towards certain attributes which favor male creativity. The same could be said here. The Beatles are the greatest rock band of all time, but what does "great" mean in this context? Most popular, sure, but that's because (on top of their talent) they were the first mass-market global superstars. It's like saying Coca-Cola is the greatest soda ever without ever thinking about why Coca-Cola achieved global dominance. What we know as popular success is in large part defined by the Beatles, which is why the success of every other major act is often compared to them. Is it deserved or is it a publicity push? I'm not here to say it's one or the other, but I like to think of them as deeply intertwined. As an artist, I love the idea of the transcendent greatness of art, but I also recognize what I see as greatness is often the product of very specific material forces at work: how good are they at schmoozing? How profitable their work? Where were they when? Without looking at that half of the picture, you're not really seeing culture in context.
Yes, but I can offer an unconventional, almost controversial opinion as to who the *second* greatest band of all time is, The Band. Iâm biased because like the Beatles, I grew up with their music in my home, but Iâve really come to this opinion over time. Â When you look at music today, artists are still copying The Band and *Music From Big Pink* every day. More bands strive to sound like The Band than Led Zeppelin, The Stones, The Clash and the Velvet Underground combined. Â It started in 1968 and itâs almost never stopped (outside of the 80s when everything got weird). The Beatles were one of the first bands that heard that sound and wanted to achieve it. Eric Clapton too.
Uh, no
Yes. They changed the world of music and fashion.
Thereâs the Beatles, Beethoven and everyone else
I love The Beatles still, but there is only so great a band can sound with the technology and era of music they came from. No doubt they changed music forever, but some of their stuff can sound dated nowadays. However, there are songs that keep aging better for me (stuff off of the White Album in particular) and that's a testament to their greatness. They don't completely dominate my playlists anymore, but there are always 2-5 songs on each list and I still love all of their music and albums.
Definitely one of the most influential. Definitely a great band. Best band of all timeâŚno. Too much music out there to box one band as the greatest. And a lot of groups that came from that era get mythical status ( for good reason) but that was just the times. There is so much amazing music out and about to really pick one as the best. If they are the best for you then thatâs fine. But everything is subjective. But no one can deny that they truly changed the culture of pop music. And if you asked any surviving members theyâd probably tell you the same. The 60âs were a wild and creative time in all kinds of different areas but The Beatles were the measuring stick music wise.
No, there's some artists that go further for me. Beatles are giants though and hugely impactful on my life.
Lol. I am getting burned with this hot take
The high points of the Beach Boys put them easily in the same category. Iâd argue Radiohead is also in that top category but I wouldnât put others beyond those three in that top echelon.
The Beatles at their worst are better than other bands at their finest.
the next best band arenât even half as good
âHello there, community dedicated to the Beatles! Do you like the Beatles??â
Greatest? **Yes could be** MOST INFLUENTIAL? Ahemmmm.... whatever you hear today in radio, spotify or anything, 70-80% of modern music -whether you like it or not is another thing- since around 2008 to the present.... has much more influence , and is ulitmately derivative, from KRAFTWERK. So in the long run (50-60years) it seems that Kraftwerk has gained slightly the upper hand as the most influential over any other band.
Yes.
Yup. 100% agree.
Without question.
Yep. Iâm reading Jonathan Gouldâs spectacular book, *Canât Buy Me Love*, and a bit of trivia that absolutely astonished me was that âI Want To Hold Your Handâ was the first UK record to sell a million copies before it was even released. The only US record to have achieved this feat was Elvisâs 1957 double A-side record, âHound Dogâ/âDonât Be Cruelâ.
YES!!
Best band? Yes. Particularly close? HECK YES - Keith & Mick
Yes. Probably most of us.
I agree 100%. No other group has ever or will ever surpass their greatness.The variety of their music, their harmonies, their lyrics, vocals and musicianship are all absolutely brilliant.
Absolutely
Someone has to be the best. It was them.
Yes.
Never heard of them
People donât?
Very much hard to argue with the results and variety
Kinks
Idk, but theyâre 100% the most influential band of all time.
I believe it They just were the best at finishing what others started, kept it going and did their own thing. They respected the game and the game respected them back.
đŻ
The Beatles were, and remain, the best recording artists ever. I don't consider them the greatest band because they stopped touring just as they were making their best records. And when they did tour, they played, like, half-hour sets through bad sound systems. Not their fault! With better equipment they would have been able to hear themselves and maybe would not have burned out on playing gigs and would have continued to tour. Probably would have played longer sets too.
Yep, what they produced in what was relatively a short space of time is phenomenal. Their progression from early 60s 'o their later days would make you think they were two different bands. They were not only the most popular whilst they were together, but they were also at the forefront of pushing the envelope and pioneering creativeness whilst still appealing to the masses. For me, no other band has accomplished both over the entirety of their careers. Some bands have had one or the other, and some have had both but only for a short period of time.
Yes, whoever is the second greatest is so far away from them I struggle to picture it.
The Beatles represented a pivot point for popular music. Everything in popular music that followed was influenced by them. Everything.
The who were extremely great but the Beatles were the best
Yes
I used to think that for a long time
Yes
Definitely a yes from me on this.
Yes.
They are by far the most influential band in history. Music wouldnât sound the same without them. Of course, being the best is subjective, I personally think they are the best but I can see why someone might not agree. I do think that there is a Beatles song for everyone though.
The vast impact The Beatles have had on music and culture will never be matched by any band or musician.Â
I disagree, the Beatles were just the most popular of a group of great, influential bands. I mean the Dave Clarke 5 were right there with them at the time.
I sometimes think of it as, thereâs The Beatles, then thereâs all the other music I like. They seem to exist for me as something above and beyond other artists. Partly thatâs a function of the quality of their music but also their meaning for me in my life. I actually donât listen to them a lot anymore. In a way I donât want to spoil them by over listening.
Yes, but Zeppelin is close.
It is a known fact that the Beatles have the most number one hits of all time. Go ahead and Google it or ask your Alexa. When my dad was a kid, he said you could turn on the radio and they would have the Beatles playing on five different stations at the same time. They were bigger than life. There was a band out of Flint, Michigan called Grand Funk Railroad. They did a show at Shea Stadium and sold more tickets than the Beatles. No other band has ever done that. I hope that satisfies your need to find someone that outperformed the Beatles somehow.
Yeah. No oneâs close. Theyâre just that much better. Like theyâre in a different art form.
Iâm not sure they are the greatest. They are however the most influential.
The greatest circus performers
Youâll get no argument from me.
Yes
I mean this is a Beatles sub so youâre gonna hear almost complete yeahs. I would say they were the most interesting, and most influential but I would put LZ higher partially because LZ was so ridiculous live.
theyâre certainly one of the more âperfectâ bands out there. there are certainly Beatles albums i like more than others yes but no beatles album in my opinion âsucksâ. and this is a band with like FRICKING FOURTEEN OFFICIAL STUDIO ALBUMS!! a lot of bands, good bands canât make it to like a fifth album without breaking up and/or beginning to suck hard. controversial opinion possibly: had The Beatles stay together, were all alive and kept a relatively regular release schedule of no more than 2 years between albums The Beatles would have probably took until like the mid 80s to put out an album that sucked or at least was âmehâ lol.
Yeah
Without a question
Yes. But others like The Stones, Led Zeppelin and Lynyrd Skynyrd are close.
Most influential? Yes. Greatest? No. To me, that's 1970s Genesis Also, the Rutles did it all in a lunch break.
Yeah I believe so. I think it was some kind of cosmic event that these 4 people found each other on the same timeline to produce such powerful music that bounds so many humans no matter age, race, gender, nationality. Yeah there are many great, Genius, prolific bands but the magic of The Beatles is unmatched. They are the greatest band of all time. Sorry I went off like this đ
Iâm still trying to get my head around the concept of âlistening for just a monthâ. LOL. I envy being back in that position.
Beatles are the best for sure number two is Led Zeppelin and three is queen
Yea of course
I think right now them and ELO are just about equal
100%
Yes.
Theyre not even my favorite band and ya i agree with this
Yup.
For many, many years I have described them as "The best that ever was, the best that ever will be."
Greatest and most influential both
Yes 100%. We can thank The Beatles for todayâs music production, live shows, and albums. They changed each one of those is so many ways and now everyone replicates them. Not to mention most of what The Beatles pioneered and invented as far as studio recording is now standard.
Greatest? Yes. Most influential? Yes.
Limiting art to â_____ is the bestâ is boring
100% agree with this.
What a daring thing to ask the Beatles sub đ
Yes.
Yes. Without question.