Unironically the worst band in music history

sales figures say otherwise, everything else is opinion

by far not the worst, but still shit

If The Beach Boys finished Smile, these guys would've been an historical footnote.

Instead, The Beatles finished them.

Attached: the_beatles-strawberry_fields_forever_s_8.jpg (800x800, 89K)

This.

Revolver is adored by contraian pseuds because it is slightly less iconic and lauded than say, Abbey Road or The White Album (both of which are superior experimentally and sonically), so it becomes the cool and rebel choice when prompted with 'whats the best Beatles album?'.

Don't get me wrong, it's a great album, but it is far too safe and accessable to truly be great art. It also spawned fucking Yellow Submarine, so there's that.

Abbey Road's ending medley is corny as fuck, and the White Album has a couple of genuinely bad songs. Revolver is the only completely consistent Beatles album

>Ringo says he never practiced on drums
>George said he never practiced on guitar
>John was never good at anything
>Paul never said he practiced at anything either

Attached: CTefCxAXAAAtFWC.jpg (600x451, 36K)

>Abbey Road's ending medley is corny as fuck, and the White Album has a couple of genuinely bad songs.
Pleb alert.

>Revolver is adored by contraian pseuds because it is slightly less iconic and lauded than say, Abbey Road or The White Album (both of which are superior experimentally and sonically), so it becomes the cool and rebel choice when prompted with 'whats the best Beatles album?'.
Holy shit this. And it’s funny because you’ll only see people praise it as the best on Yea Forums because they’re such a braindead circlejerk. Still a great, album as said, but Yea Forums’s shallow and hiveminded praise for it just makes it nothing more than fedoracore for drones of this place that believe preferring it makes them ”durr patrician”.

>I like the most popular albums of all time, therefore signaling my patrician, non-prole taste

reply to

to be fair, some of their music has a mediocre appeal. the rest is bad or terrible based on what i heard.

either they were the boys band of their time, or their music aged really badly.

rolling stones sound a bit better, if at least, through their unironic use in modern movies and commercials/

Lol what? Beatles would've been among one of the best band ever if you consider only Rubber Soul, Revolver and Sgt. Pepper's run.

>60's Jonas Brothers
Goodness gracious this could not be more wrong.
The Brill Building Era was that. The Beatles ended the Brill Building era which was a very short span from the late 50's to the early 60's. It was the peak of shitty groups with absolutely no talent whatsoever. They ended that, shifting the paradigm so much that exactly two groups have chartings before their show on the Ed Sullivan Show and after Rubber Soul comes out - The Four Seasons and The Beach Boys. They wiped the slate clean. They were poppy, sure, but 60's Jonas Brothers they were not, especially because there was a genuine sense of rebellion to them. The music may have been lighthearted but watch the interviews and you realize those are lads joking around in ways that corporate meddling could never achieve.

Terrible, embarrassing post.

>rolling stones was a bit better
This made me laugh though

The Beatles' legacy is overblown because a lack of real artistic competition in pop music at the time. Pet Sounds already gave them a run for their money. Pet Sounds 2 would've completely changed the narrative surrounding the Beatles being the only true artists writing pop tunes

Consistency alone doesn't make a 'best' album. The Beatles have plenty of lean, consistent albums, regardless, such as Rubber Soul, Sgt. Pepper, Magical Mystery Tour, With the Beatles,

>Magical Mystery Tour,
LMFAO I hope you mean consistently bad in that case

kek
sheep
Word.
That's just downright contrarian, they were very financially successful, as well as being one of the most popular bands of all time, and furthermore, most of them are really good musicians.
citation needed, they had great guitar and piano writing.

I want to hold your band

>music is a competition
No

>playing for 4 hours straight every night for years in a shitty Hamberg pub isn't practice
Also there are literal practice tapes of The Beatles in 1960, as well as the fack they showed up to the studio already knowing their songs (which implies they had *practiced* ahead of time)

It is. The Greeks were right with their concept of arete, and the competitions they ran for theater and music

>popularity matters either way
Spotted the pleb who doesn't know what "patrician" means

plebeian concept of art

>John Lennon writes the best Beatles song by far with A Day In the Life
>Paul ruins it with his gay ass verse
Reminder that Paul and Ringo are what kept The Beatles from becoming a truly great band

Stop being stupid

The Beatles wouldn't have evolved into their post-Sgt. Pepper's phrase if Pet Sounds didn't spark a sense of competition in them. Same with Brian Wilson listening to Rubber Soul. Musical evolution has always been propelled by a sense of wanting to one up your inspirations

>Title track, Fool on the hill, Flying, Your Mother Should Know, I Am the Walrus, Hello Goodbye, Strawberry Fields Forever, Penny Lane, All you need is Love
>Bad

Your taste is so shit that even your breath reeks of it.

John was a total junkie hippie piece of trash.

And was the superior songwriter.

Paul's bridge adds so much tension and release to the song, elevating John's section even more. Wtf are you smoking.

>The Beatles wouldn't have evolved into their post-Sgt. Pepper's phrase if Pet Sounds didn't spark a sense of competition in them
Ooops you confused inspiration/influence with competition! Sorry to hear that

What a terrible opinion

Remember to love your neighbours : )

Attached: people_harrison-1.jpg (1492x1996, 569K)

Paul didn't write a single good song post-Beatles. John Lennon wrote at least 5.

Where to cop glasses

Remember not to plagiarize George

great rebuttal, you've really got me against the ropes here

Live and Let Die
Maybe I'm Amazed
Band on the Run
Wonderful Christmas Time
FourFiveSeconds
Ebony and Ivory

Christmas song

Holy Fuck please don't be ironic that song is absolute garbage. The rest are 10/10.

I said good songs user

>Paul didn't write a single good song post-Beatles.
I feel like you've never listened to a single solo McCartney album
What do you consider a good McCartney song?

Fellas, there's no reason to be so mad
Very nice posts, Maestro would be proud

Attached: ringo-starr-elton-john-and-george-harrison.jpg (620x423, 52K)

Not an argument

George was the best post-Beatles. The two Travelling Wilburys albums are better than anything the other guys did. Plus some of his solo albums are amazing.

Shame about him being a thief and all

Yeah well he bought the rights to that song so it all worked out

Let go of your anger friend

Attached: quote-love-one-another-his-last-words-george-harrison-76-67-52.jpg (625x294, 40K)

>The two Travelling Wilburys albums are better than anything the other guys did.
That's because it was mostly written by Tom Petty, Bob Dylan, Roy Orbison and Jeff Lynn you dipshit

I'm not being ironic. I'm probably personally biased, but something about that song always hits me in the Christmas nostalgia feels like literally no other besides maybe NKC's rendition of The Christmas Song

...

Handle With Care is the best post Beatles song. I'm NOT a dipshit.

Not an argument

I guess I'm biased too. We'd have family get togethers and that song was on the CD my aunt would play. I just never liked it.

I am sorry you are so full of contretemps, may you have a nice day.

Attached: 7ef833712d807866eaa3ef9e2cc4deae--george-harrison-dark-horse.jpg (236x251, 14K)

The Beatles were a great band. It's their influence that was so awful. Rock and roll was music for bad kids until they came along and turned a generation of would be folkies into rock fans. Plus they penned their own hits, leading the next generation of rockers to believe they could do the same. Which makes them sort of responsible for countless lame rock songs as well as pioneering the boy band aesthetic. Then at the height of their fame they stopped touring and became a studio only band creating the concept of AOR. Of course that led to years of records being made that were mostly filler. Thanks a fucking lot Fab Four Fuckers.

That is just one song, and you mentioned two albums.

Also all four of them wrote it together. George only wrote like 1/5th of it

Give an actual argument, and you shall receive
OK

It is just so unlike any other, typically hokey and derivative Christmas song. It has a really somber, almost detatched atmosohere, like it is physically telling the listener of all the happy activities of Christmas while really bearing a longing for older times. It really connects to that sad nostalgia of Christmas that I always feel and find lacking in other popular songs.

OK maybe I'm a dipshit. But I still enjoy anything George was a part of more thsn any of the other 3 after the Beatles.

>I enjoy it more, so it's better
Not how it works.

It does to me so fight me

I walk the line by Johnny Cash maybe

Sorry. I'm stupid and slightly drunk. I'm just a dipshit.

I know.

i partially agree but i loved "don't look back anger" so not all their songs were terrible.

They look neat and I know that they're really popular. I've hard some of their songs and they're kind of catchy.

Good thing I'm never listening to any of their albums on purpose, LOL!

Ha damn. I deserve that.

bad opinion

Alright but seriously, if you count Harrison's mark of quality as his stronger songs in The Beatles (Something, Sun, etc) then he makes a sharp dip in quality after Living In The Material World and never returns to a consistent quality, unlike Lennon & McCartney. But with that said, All Things Must pass and LITMNW are gold.

True. I guess I'm just biased because my dad's favourite Beatle was George, and his post Beatles stuff was always playing when I was growing up. Paul to some extent as well, but nothing from John because my dad is very conservative when it comes to music, so he gravitated towards George because he made fsirly straightforward songs. Lennon/Ono had some amazing songs.

That's fine. Lennon's stuff is fairly underrated, I'd check it out. Each of his solo albums had about 50% great songs (but plastic Ono Band consistently great). The other half, well...

Imagine thinking your taste is above the greatest band ever

Kek

Yeah I should pay more attention to it. My dad even had a solo ringo LP but nothing from John.

>My dad even had a solo ringo LP but nothing from John.
Talk about child abuse.

Yeah no kidding. At least my mom liked some more interesting stuff.

I get it. The Beatles are considered the best band in history so you felt the need to say the exact opposite. Upvoted.

That ending only works because of Paul's section (from the verse where he sings to the start of John's next verse). I'm being 100% serious here.

not even close to a contrarian pseud and Revolver is my favorite beatles album. I just like Revolver's ability to craft great pop tunes, and I'm not so much of a fan of sgt. peppers attempt at a psychedelic "concept album." Great record, but Revolver is something I like to go back to.